Paclitaxel/carboplatin/etoposide versus paclitaxel/topotecan for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network randomized, prospective phase II trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the combination of paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, http://www.bms.com) and topotecan (Hycamtin; Glaxo SmithKline, Philadelphia, http://www.gsk.com) with paclitaxel, carboplatin (Paraplatin; Bristol-Myers Squibb), and etoposide (Etopophos, VePesid; Bristol-Myers Squibb) in patients with previously untreated extensive-stage small cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase II trial, 120 patients were randomly allocated to receive either topotecan (1.5 mg/m(2) i.v. days 1, 2, and 3) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1) every 21 days orpaclitaxe l (200 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1), carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve 6 i.v. day 1), and etoposide (50 mg/100 mg alternating daily by mouth days 1-10) every 21 days, each regimen for a maximum of eight cycles. The primary end points were objective response rate and time to progression. RESULTS: The paclitaxel-carboplatin-etoposide combination produced a significantly higher overall response rate (78% versus 48%), longer median time to progression (7.6 months versus 5.5 months), and greater number of patients free from progression at 1 year (14% versus 8%) compared with paclitaxel plus topotecan. There was no difference in overall survival. Toxicities were similar in the two treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: The paclitaxel-carboplatin-etoposide combination produced a superior overall response rate and time to progression in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer compared with paclitaxel plus topotecan. The platinum compounds continue to be a necessary component of the initial therapy for these patients.

Rituximab plus short-duration chemotherapy as first-line treatment for follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a phase II trial of the minnie pearl cancer research network.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of rituximab with short-duration chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of patients with follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated stage II-IV follicular NHL, grade 1 or 2, were eligible for this multicenter phase II trial. All patients received four weekly doses of rituximab (375 mg/m(2) intravenous), followed by three courses of combination chemotherapy (either cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone [CHOP], or cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone [CVP]) plus rituximab. Patients were evaluated for response after completing treatment, and were then followed up at 3-month intervals. RESULTS: Between January 2000 and July 2001, 86 patients were treated. Eight-two patients (95%) completed treatment; no patient was withdrawn due to toxicity. The overall response rate was 93%, with 55% complete responses. After a median follow-up of 42 months, the 3- and 4-year actuarial progression-free survivals were 71% and 62%, respectively. Five patients (6%) died from lymphoma; the overall actuarial survival at 3 years was 95%. Grade 3/4 leukopenia occurred in 53% of patients, but only six patients (7%) had neutropenia or fever. Grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were uncommon. CONCLUSION: Rituximab plus short-course chemotherapy is well tolerated as first-line treatment for patients with follicular NHL. The overall and complete response rates are similar to those reported with chemotherapy/rituximab combinations of longer duration. The actuarial progression-free survival of 62% at 4 years is encouraging, but further follow-up is necessary. Rituximab plus short-course chemotherapy may prove to be as effective as longer-duration chemotherapy and currently provides an attractive option for first-line treatment of elderly patients and others who tolerate chemotherapy poorly.

Carcinoma of unknown primary site: sequential treatment with paclitaxel/carboplatin/etoposide and gemcitabine/irinotecan: a Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network phase II trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the sequential administration of paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Princeton, NJ), carboplatin (Paraplatin; Bristol-Myers Squibb), and oral etoposide (VePesid; Bristol-Myers Squibb) followed by gemcitabine (Gemzar; Eli Lilly; Indianapolis, IN) and irinotecan (Campostar; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals; New York, NY) in the first-line treatment of patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred thirty-two patients were treated with sequential combination chemotherapy for a maximum of six cycles. All patients had relatively poor prognostic features. Fifty-nine patients had well-differentiated adenocarcinoma, 73 patients had poorly differentiated carcinoma, and 121 patients had performance status scores of 0 or 1. RESULTS: Thirty-three (30%) of 111 assessable patients (95% confidence interval 27%-33%) had objective responses to treatment (26 partial responses, seven complete responses). The combination of gemcitabine and irinotecan was associated with significantly less toxicity than the triple-drug regimen and improved the responses in several patients (10%). The response rates were similar in the two major histologic tumor types, but were lower for patients with liver-dominant tumors (13%) and higher for patients with lymph-node-dominant tumors (50%). The median progression-free survival time, median survival time, and actuarial survival rates at 1 and 2 years were 5.7 months, 9.1 months, 35%, and 16%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sequential combination chemotherapy with paclitaxel/carboplatin/oral etoposide and gemcitabine/irinotecan is an active treatment for patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site, but overall toxicities are greater than those seen with other combinations of new drugs and survival appears similar to that observed in 264 other patients treated in our four previous phase II trials. A better understanding of the biology of these heterogeneous tumors will likely lead to improved therapy for these patients.

Weekly paclitaxel, estramustine phosphate, and oral etoposide in the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma: results of a Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of weekly paclitaxel, oral etoposide, and estramustine phosphate in the treatment of patients with advanced, hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma. METHODS: Patients with hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma who had received no more than one previous chemotherapy regimen were eligible for this trial. Forty-two patients were treated between February 1998 and March 2000. Toxicity was excessive in the first 3 patients treated (Grade 3-4 leukopenia, 3 patients; death due to sepsis, 1 patient); the remaining 39 patients received lower doses of etoposide and estramustine phosphate (paclitaxel 50 mg/m(2) as a 1-hour, intravenous infusion on Days 1, 8, 15; etoposide 50 mg orally twice daily on Days 1-10; and estramustine phosphate 280 mg orally 3 times daily on Days 1-10). Courses were repeated every 28 days. Patients were evaluated for objective and/or serologic response after two courses of treatment; responding patients continued treatment for six courses. RESULTS: Fourteen of 40 evaluable patients (35%) had either an objective response or a serologic response to treatment. The median survival for the entire group was 9.5 months, with 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year survival rates of 38%, 12%, and 10%, respectively. Neutropenia was the most common Grade 3-4 toxicity and occurred in 38% of patients (11% of courses). Thirteen patients (33%) had severe fatigue, and 2 patients had treatment-related deaths due to sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Although the three-drug combination had activity in patients with hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma, the results did not appear any better than the results achieved with less toxic taxane/estramustine phosphate combinations. Further development of this three-drug regimen is not recommended.

Long-term follow-up of patients treated with paclitaxel/carboplatin-based chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: sequential phase II trials of the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network.

PURPOSE: To provide long-term follow-up on the survival of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with paclitaxel/carboplatin-based regimens in a multicenter, community-based setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between March 1995 and April 1998, 321 patients with newly diagnosed stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer were treated on sequential phase II trials with the following combination regimens: paclitaxel/carboplatin, paclitaxel/carboplatin/gemcitabine, and paclitaxel/carboplatin/vinorelbine. Details of these three regimens and patient populations have been previously reported. Responding and stable patients continued treatment until tumor progression or for a recommended six treatment courses. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 58 months (minimum follow-up, 40 months), the median survival for the entire group of patients was 8.6 months, with actual 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates of 40%, 19%, and 7%, respectively. The actuarial 4-year survival rate for the entire group was 4%. No statistically significant differences in survival were seen among the three regimens. Administration of all three regimens was feasible in a community-based setting; however, myelosuppression and hospitalizations for treatment of neutropenia/fever were more frequent with the three-drug regimens. CONCLUSION: Paclitaxel/carboplatin-based regimens, in addition to prolonging median survival and improving 1-year survival, result in substantial improvements in the 2-year survival of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer when compared retrospectively with supportive care or traditional cisplatin-based regimens. In these sequential phase II trials, we did not demonstrate any advantages of three-drug regimens when compared with paclitaxel/carboplatin. Because few patients remain alive after 4 years with any of these chemotherapy regimens, future treatment improvements will require the introduction of novel agents.

Paclitaxel, carboplatin, and topotecan in the treatment of patients with small cell lung cancer: a phase II trial of the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, toxicity, and efficacy of a novel three-drug regimen containing paclitaxel, carboplatin, and topotecan followed by oral etoposide in the first-line treatment of patients with small cell lung carcinoma. METHODS: One hundred five patients with previously untreated, limited stage or extensive stage small cell lung carcinoma were treated in this multicenter, community-based, Phase II trial. All patients received paclitaxel 135 mg/m(2) by 1-hour intravenous (i.v.) infusion on Day 1, carboplatin at an area under the serum concentration-time curve of 5.0 i.v. on Day 1, and topotecan 0.75 mg/ m(2) i.v. on Days 1-3. The treatment regimen was repeated at 21-day intervals for 4 courses. Patients with limited stage disease also received radiation therapy (45 grays [Gy]; in single daily fractions of 1.8 Gy) beginning concurrently with the third course of chemotherapy. Patients who had an objective response or stable disease after 4 courses of combined paclitaxel, carboplatin, and topotecan then received 3 courses of oral etoposide (50 mg alternating with 100 mg for 10 consecutive days) repeated at 21-day intervals. RESULTS: Treatment with paclitaxel, carboplatin, and topotecan produced response rates of 88% and 93% in patients with extensive stage disease and limited stage disease, respectively. The median survival for patients with extensive stage and limited stage disease was 8.3 months and 17.2 months, respectively. The addition of oral etoposide was feasible, but there was no suggestion that it prolonged remission. This three- drug regimen was associated with acceptable toxicity in patients with a good performance status, although it was tolerated very poorly by patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2; 5 of 12 patients (42%) had treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Although this three-drug regimen was active in the treatment of patients with small cell lung carcinoma, it was more toxic than standard platinum and etoposide regimens and provided no apparent improvement in efficacy. Further investigation of topotecan as a component of first-line therapy should focus on two-drug combination regimens in which the topotecan dose can be optimized. Routine use of three-drug regimens in patients with small cell lung carcinoma should await demonstration of superiority in randomized trials.

Gemcitabine, carboplatin, and paclitaxel for patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site: a Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of the novel chemotherapy combination that includes gemcitabine, carboplatin, and paclitaxel in the treatment of patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty patients were treated with the following regimen, administered every 21 days for a planned four courses: gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) intravenously (i.v.) on days 1 and 8, carboplatin at an estimated area under the concentration-time curve of 5 mg min/mL i.v. on day 1, and paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) i.v. on day 1. After four courses, stable and responding patients were given weekly paclitaxel 70 mg/m(2) i.v. for 6 weeks for three 8-week courses. All patients had relatively poor prognostic features. Sixty-three patients had well-differentiated adenocarcinoma, 56 patients had poorly differentiated carcinoma, and 104 patients had performance status of 0 or 1. RESULTS: Twenty-eight (25%) of 113 assessable patients (95% confidence interval, 22% to 30%) had major objective responses to treatment. Response rates were similar in the two major histologic types. Response rate did not seem to be improved by continued therapy with weekly paclitaxel. The median progression-free survival time was 6 months. Median survival for the entire group was 9 months, and the actuarial survival at 1 and 2 years was 42% and 23%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine, carboplatin, and paclitaxel followed by weekly paclitaxel is an active and tolerable treatment for patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site. The survival seen in this poor-prognosis group of patients in this multicenter community-based trial is notable and similar to other taxane-based regimens for these patients. Study of additional combinations or sequences of newer drugs, as well as the exploration of targeted biologic agents for patients with an identified target in their tumors, is warranted.