Docetaxel in combination with mitoxantrone and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as front-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: a multicenter phase II study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the activity and tolerance of docetaxel in combination with mitoxantrone and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) as front-line treatment in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-four previously untreated patients with MBC who had bidimensionally measurable disease were enrolled onto the study. Forty-eight (89%) patients had visceral metastases and nineteen (36%) had relapsed within twelve months following adjuvant chemotherapy. Docetaxel (100 mg/m2) was given on day 1 after appropriate premedication and mitoxantrone (20 mg/m2) on day 8. G-CSF (150 mcg/m2/d s.c.) was administered from day 2 to day 6 and from day 9 to day 15. The regimen was repeated every three weeks, on an outpatient basis. RESULTS: In an intention-to-treat analysis, 9 (17%) CRs, 24 (44%) PRs, (overall response rate 61%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 48.1%-74.1%), 12 (22%) SD and 9 (17%) PD were observed. The median duration of response and the median time to tumor progression was 12.5 and 14 months, respectively. The overall median survival was 16.5 months, whilst the probability for one- and three-year survival was 61% and 35%, respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 37 (69%) patients, and febrile neutropenia in 16 (30%); there was one death due to sepsis. Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia occurred in four (8%) patients. Grade 2-3 neurosensory toxicity was observed in 8 (15%) patients and grade 2-3 asthenia in 24 (45%). CONCLUSIONS: Docetaxel in combination with mitoxantrone and G-CSF support is an intensified and active front-line regimen for patients with MBC; despite its hematological toxicity, this regimen merits further comparison with other standard anthracycline- and/or taxane-based combinations.

A multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing paclitaxel-cisplatin-etoposide versus cisplatin-etoposide as first-line treatment in patients with small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous phase I-II studies have shown that the combination of paclitaxel-cisplatin-etoposide (TEP) is very active and well tolerated in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). In order to compare the TEP combination to cisplatin etoposide (EP) regimen as front-line treatment in patients with SCLC, we conducted a randomised multicenter study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred thirty-three chemotherapy-naïve patients with histologically proven limited or extensive stage SCLC were randomised to receive either paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 i.v. three-hour infusion on day 1 and cisplatin 80 mg/m2 i.v. on day 2 and etoposide 80 mg/m2 i.v. on days 2-4 with G-CSF support (5 mcg/kg s.c. days 5-15) or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1 and etoposide 120 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1-3 in cycles every twenty-eight days. RESULTS: Due to excessive toxicity and mortality observed in the TEP arm, an early interim analysis was performed and the study was closed. Sixty-two patients received two hundred sixty-one cycles of TEP and seventy-one patients three hundred twenty-three cycles of EP The two patient groups were well balanced for age, sex, performance status, stage of disease and the presence of abnormal LDH at diagnosis. In an intention-to-treat overall analysis both regimens were equally active with a complete and partial response rate of 50% (95% confidence interval (CI): 37.5%-62.4%) for TEP and 48% (95%) CI: 36.2%-59.5%) for EP (P = 0.8). The median time to disease progression was 11 months for TEP and 9 months for EP (P = 0.02). The duration of response, one-year survival and overall survival were similar in the two arms. Similarly, in an intention-to-treat subgroup analysis of patients with limited or extensive stage disease, there was no difference in the activity between the two regimens except of a longer median time to disease progression in the extensive stage in favour of the TEP regimen, eight versus six months (P = 0.04). However, there were eight toxic deaths in the TEP arm versus none in the EP arm (P = 0.001). Moreover, the TEP regimen was associated with more severe toxicity than the EP regimen in terms of grade 4 neutropenia (P = 0.04), grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (P = 0.02), febrile neutropenia (P = 0.08), grade 3-4 diarrhea (P = 0.01), grade 3-4 asthenia (P = 0.05) and grade 3 neurotoxicity (P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: In this early terminated study, the TEP regimen was significantly more toxic than the EP regimen. The TEP regimen is associated with significant toxicity and mortality, and should not be used outside of a protocol setting. For future investigations, dose and schedule modifications are necessary to reduce toxicity.

First-line treatment with mitoxantrone, methotrexate, vincristine, and carboplatine (MIMOC) plus cyclical hormonotherapy with tamoxifen and megestrol acetate in advanced breast cancer.

Fifty patients with stage IIIB and IV breast cancer entered a prospective study receiving combination chemotherapy consisting of mitoxantrone (8 mg/m2) on day 1, methotrexate (30 mg/m2) on day 1, vincristine (1 mg/m2) on day 2, and carboplatine (250 mg/m2) on day 2 (MIMOC), plus cyclical hormonotherapy with tamoxifen (20 mg daily, days 1-10) and megestrol acetate (160 mg daily, days 11-21). The regimen was repeated every 3 weeks. None had received chemotherapy for advanced disease, although 17 patients had previously received adjuvant chemotherapy and 21 had received adjuvant hormonotherapy with tamoxifen. Twenty-seven patients had positive estrogen receptor (ER+) status, and 23 negative estrogen receptor (ER-) status. Response was observed in 31 (62%) of the 50 analyzed patients (95% CI: 48.5-75.4%), with 5 complete responses (10%). A significantly better response rate was observed in ER+ patients (p = 0.03). The median duration of response was 16 months, and the median time to disease progression was 18 months. The median overall survival was 19 months (27 for responders and 7 for nonresponders). ER+ patients had a higher probability of survival (p = 0.02). Toxicity was moderate. Nausea/vomiting and myelotoxicity were the main side effects. In conclusion, MIMOC plus cyclical hormonotherapy represents a well-tolerated and effective first-line treatment for advanced breast cancer. The observed difference in response and survival in favor of ER+ patients warrants further investigation.

Post-chemotherapy lymphopoiesis in patients with solid tumors is characterized by CD4+ cell proliferation.

PURPOSE: A phenolypic analysis of peripheral blood lymphocytes was carried out in order to investigate the lymphopenia developed in some patients with solid tumors treated with systemic chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Peripheral blood was obtained from 53 cancer patients receiving chemotherapy with more than grade 2 neutropenia, before treatment, during the nadir of neutrophils and after bone marrow recovery. Cell phenotype was performed using monoclonal antibodies while cell proliferation, using 3HTdR uptake, was evaluated after cell stimulation with PHA-P and anti-CD3 moAb. RESULTS: Post-chemotherapy myelosuppression and rhG-CSF-induced bone marrow recovery were associated with lymphopenia and lymphocytosis reaching pre-treatment values, respectively; both lymphopenia and lymphocytosis concerned all lymphocyte subpopulations. Lymphocytosis was positively correlated with the absolute number of CD3+, CD4+ and CD20+ cells; in addition, the absolute number of HLA-DR+ and CD25+ cells was also increased. During bone marrow recovery, the absolute number of CD25+ cells was correlated with the increased number of both CD3+/CD25+ and CD4+/CD25+ but not of CD8+/CD25+ or CD20+/CD25+ cells. CD4+ lymphopenia (less than 400 cells/dL) was detected in 58% and 21% of the patients during myelosuppression and bone marrow recovery, respectively. PHA-P and anti-CD3 moAb failed to enhance lymphocyte proliferation in 60% and 44% of the patients during bone marrow recovery, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Post-chemotherapy CD4+ cell repopulation is an active phenomenon. However, in several patients CD4 lymphopenia, which could be associated with functional cell abnormalities, may persist during bone marrow recovery leading to impaired cell-mediated immunity.

Salvage chemotherapy in anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer patients with docetaxel and gemcitabine: a multicenter phase II trial. Greek Breast Cancer Cooperative Group.

PURPOSE: The activity of the docetaxel-gemcitabine combination in women with disease progression after initial chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) was investigated in a multicenter phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients with metastatic breast cancer who had disease relapse or progression after completion of an anthracycline-based front-line regimen were treated with gemcitabine 900 mg/m2 on day 1 and day 8 and docetaxel 100 mg/m2 on day 8. G-CSF 150 mucg/m2/d s.c. was given from day 9 to day 16 and the treatment was repeated every three weeks. The patients' median age was 57 years and the performance status (WHO) was 0 for 26, 1 for 20 and 2 for 6 patients. The treatment was second-line for 27 (52%) and > or = third-line for 25 (48%) patients. All patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. RESULTS: Complete response occurred in seven (14%) patients and partial response in 21 (40%) for an overall response rate of 54% (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 40%-67%). Fifteen (29%) patients had stable disease and nine (17%) progressive disease. Of 25 patients previously treated with taxanes. 11 (44%) responded (1 CR, 10 PR). Interestingly, in four patients with disease progression while receiving docetaxel or paclitaxel monotherapy, the docetaxel + gemcitabine combination achieved partial responses. Responses were observed at all metastatic sites (local disease 62%, lymph nodes 58%, skin 44%, lung 47% and liver 36%) with a median duration of response of 3.6 months (range 1-16) and a median time to disease progression of eight months (range 2-18.5). Grade 3 neutropenia developed in 10 (19%) and grade 4 in five (10%) patients. Neutropenia was associated with infection in four patients without toxic deaths. Grade 3 thrombocytopenia developed in nine (17%) patients and grade 4 in two (4%). Non-hematologic toxicity was usually mild. CONCLUSION: The docetaxel-gemcitabine combination is an active and well tolerated salvage treatment in patients with MBC. Previous treatment with taxanes does not preclude a good clinical response to this regimen.

Front-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with docetaxel and gemcitabine: a multicenter phase II trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the tolerance and efficacy of the combination of docetaxel and gemcitabine in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-one chemotherapy-naive patients with NSCLC were treated with gemcitabine 900 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8 and docetaxel 100 mg/m2 intravenously on day 8 with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (150 microg/m2, subcutaneously) support from day 9 to day 15. Treatment was repeated every 3 weeks. RESULTS: The patients' median age was 64 years. The World Health Organization performance status was 0 to 1 in 39 patients and 2 in 12 patients. Fifteen patients (29%) had stage IIIB disease, and 36 (71%) had stage IV; histology was mainly squamous cell carcinoma (59%). A partial response was achieved in 19 patients (37.5%; 95% confidence interval, 24% to 50%); stable disease and progressive disease were each observed in 16 patients (31.4%). The median duration of response and the time to tumor progression were 5 and 6 months, respectively. The median survival was 13 months, and the actuarial 1-year survival was 50.7%. Grade 4 anemia and thrombocytopenia were rare (2%). Four patients (8%) developed grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, and all were complicated with fever; there was no treatment-related death. Grade 3 or 4 diarrhea occurred in three patients (6%), grade 2 or 3 neurotoxicity in four patients (8%), grade 2 or 3 asthenia in 10 patients (20%), and grade 2 or 3 edema in 10 patients (20%). CONCLUSION: The combination of docetaxel/gemcitabine is well tolerated, can be used for outpatients, and is active for the treatment of advanced NSCLC. This treatment merits further comparison with other cisplatin- or carboplatin-based combinations.

Salvage chemotherapy with paclitaxel, vinorelbine, and cisplatin (PVC) in anthracycline-resistant advanced breast cancer.

The tolerance and the efficacy of the paclitaxel-vinorelbine-cisplatin combination (PVC regimen) was evaluated in 33 patients with anthracycline-resistant stage IV breast cancer, who had disease progression under anthracycline- or mitoxantrone-based chemotherapy. Fourteen (42%) and 19 (58%) patients had primary and secondary resistance to anthracyclines, respectively; 70% had visceral metastases. Patients received vinorelbine (25 mg/m2) followed by paclitaxel (135 mg/m2) in a 3-hour infusion on day 1, and cisplatin (CDDP; 80 mg/m2) on day 2, in a 3-week schedule. A total of 208 chemotherapy courses were administered (median six courses per patient). Grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 13 patients (39%), seven of whom were hospitalized for neutropenic fever (5% of the courses). There was no toxic death. Grade 4 thrombocytopenia occurred in two patients (6%) and grade 3 anemia in three patients (9%). Grade 2 and 3 neurosensory toxicity occurred in 11 patients (32%) and two patients (6%), respectively, and grade 3/4 fatigue was observed in four patients (12%). Two (6%) complete and 17 partial responses (52%) (total, 58%; 95% confidence interval, 42%-75%) were documented. Stable disease was observed in eight patients (24%) and progression in six patients (18%). The median duration of response was 6.5+ months. The median survival was 15+ months, and the 1-year survival was 67%. In conclusion, PVC regimen is an active and well-tolerated salvage chemotherapy in patients resistant to anthracycline.

First-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with docetaxel and cisplatin: a multicenter phase II study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the docetaxel-cisplatin combination in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with histologically confirmed, measurable stage IIIB or IV NSCLC, a World Health Organization (WHO) performance status of 0-2 and adequate bone marrow, renal, hepatic and cardiac function were eligible for the study. Patients received docetaxel (100 mg/m2) as an one-hour infusion on day 1 and cisplatin (80 mg/m2) as a 30-min infusion with appropriate hydration on day 2. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF; 150 micrograms/m2, SC) was given on days 3 to 13. Treatment was repeated every three weeks. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were enrolled (28 with stage IIIB and 25 with stage IV). One complete and 23 partial responses were observed (overall response rate (OR): 45%; 95% CI: 34.1%-61.8%). The response rate was 57% and 32% in patients with stages IIIB and IV disease (P = NS). The median time to progression was 36 weeks and the median survival 48 weeks; the one-year survival was 48%. Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 23 patients, 15 of whom were hospitalized for neutropenic fever; two patients died of sepsis. Grade 2 neurotoxicity was observed in six patients and grade 3 in five patients; grade 3 fatigue occurred in seven patients, grade 3-4 mucositis in four patients and grade 3-4 diarrhea in six patients. Mild allergic reactions and oedema were observed in five and four patients, respectively. The median dose intensity was 30 mg/m2/week for docetaxel and 24 mg/m2/week for cisplatin, corresponding to 91% and 89% of the specified protocol doses, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The docetaxel-cisplatin combination is an active regimen in advanced NSCLC, but hematologic toxicity remains high despite the prophylactic use of G-CSF.

Psychiatric case identification in two Athenian communities: estimation of the probable prevalence.

A two stage cross sectional survey on the prevalence of psychiatric disorders was conducted in a sample of 1,574 adults, residents of two boroughs in the greater Athens area. In this paper we examine the value of the first stage self report symptom screening scales (CES-D and Langner) for case finding, by comparing it to five psychiatric case identification criteria, proven to be highly reliable, after the completion of an inter-rater reliability study. A higher proportion of mentally impaired respondents was found with the criterion of screening scale cut off scores than the cases found by the application of the five case identification criteria. The practical significance of establishing case finding reliable criteria is apparent for the purpose of epidemiologic research e.g. the problem of false positive and negative cases, the completion of the second stage of diagnostic interviews and for the planning of outreach programs, identifying and helping high risk individuals.