Safety Analyses of Pemetrexed-cisplatin and Pemetrexed Maintenance Therapies in Patients With Advanced Non-squamous NSCLC: Retrospective Analyses From 2 Phase III Studies.

BACKGROUND: In a phase III study, maintenance pemetrexed showed superior survival over placebo (PARAMOUNT) for patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who completed 4 cycles of pemetrexed plus cisplatin (PC) induction therapy, with low incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) generally associated with pemetrexed. Prior analyses did not account for toxicities carried over from induction; thus, the current analysis was developed to understand toxicities that may be attributed to pemetrexed maintenance versus PC induction, and how treatment duration affects toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Selected clinically relevant TEAEs were explored in 2 analyses: assessing induction versus maintenance treatment in PARAMOUNT, and comparing PC from PARAMOUNT with toxicity data from a previous phase III study that established the role of PC in front-line therapy of non-squamous NSCLC (JMDB trial). RESULTS: In PARAMOUNT, the incidence of most drug-related TEAEs was higher during induction than maintenance, for both the pemetrexed and placebo randomized populations. The majority of TEAEs during maintenance, except renal events, were carried over from induction with no change in severity from the end of induction; the incidence of TEAEs associated with pemetrexed maintenance was low. The cross-trial analysis showed that 6 cycles of PC in JMDB compared with 4 cycles in PARAMOUNT increased grade 1/2 fatigue (34.1% vs. 25.0%), anemia (24.0% vs. 13.5%), and renal events (11.8% vs. 3.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Safety data presented here support the favorable risk benefit of 4 cycles of PC followed by maintenance pemetrexed in patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC.

Use of pegfilgrastim support on day 9 to maintain relative dose intensity of chemotherapy in breast cancer patients receiving a day 1 and 8 CMF regimen.

AIM: In several commonly used regimens, chemotherapy doses are split across different days of the cycle. We aimed to determine the feasibility of growth factor support with once-per-cycle pegfilgrastim in this setting. METHODS: This phase II study in breast cancer patients assessed the utility of a single 6 mg subcutaneous dose of pegfilgrastim administered on day 9 of an intravenous (IV) "split" CMF (cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2), methotrexate 40 mg/m(2) and 5-fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2)) chemotherapy regimen administered on days 1 and 8 and repeated every 28 days for 6 cycles. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were enrolled, with 49 completing the study. For the primary endpoint, 48 patients (83%) received >or=85% of the relative dose intensity (RDI) of chemotherapy over all 6 cycles (95% confidence interval [CI], 71-91%). Across all chemotherapy cycles, 41 patients (71%) received all scheduled cycles on time and most patients (n=49, 84%) received >or=85% of the planned dose of all chemotherapy agents in all cycles. In total, 295/319 cycles (92%) were delivered on schedule and >or=85% of the planned dose of all chemotherapy agents were administered in 309/319 cycles (97%). Febrile neutropenia was reported in only 2 patients (3%). There were no grade 4 adverse events related to pegfilgrastim. DISCUSSION: Day 9 pegfilgrastim administration was well tolerated and provided effective protection against neutropenia in patients receiving IV CMF on days 1 and 8, allowing chemotherapy to be delivered on time and at the scheduled dose in most patients.