Real-world characteristics and outcomes of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients with EGFR exon 19 deletions or exon 21 mutations.

Aim: To estimate real-world (rw) outcomes for first-line therapy in patients with advanced EGF receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), focusing on specific mutation types. Patients & methods: Retrospective observational study (n = 244 patients). Results: Univariate/multivariate analyses showed longer rw progression-free survival (rwPFS) and rwPFS2 in patients with ex19del versus Leu858Arg mutations. Median overall survival was 12.3 months longer with ex19del versus Leu858Arg mutations (HR: 1.47 [95% CI: 0.96-2.25]; p = 0.074). With EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy, unadjusted rwPFS for ex19del mutations was longer than for Leu858Arg mutations (HR: 1.62 [95% CI: 1.03-2.56]; p = 0.036). Conclusion: In this rw cohort of patients with advanced EGFR+ NSCLC, ex19del mutations conferred a prognostic advantage over Leu858Arg mutations, with significantly better rwPFS and rwPFS2.

Evaluation of changes in renal function in PARAMOUNT: a phase III study of maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care after induction treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of long-term pemetrexed maintenance therapy on patients' renal function. METHODS: In the PARAMOUNT phase III trial (NCT 00789373), pemetrexed was compared with placebo as maintenance treatment in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer patients who completed 4 cycles of pemetrexed plus cisplatin induction therapy. To evaluate changes in renal function during pemetrexed continuation maintenance treatment, we retrospectively analyzed changes in serum creatinine (sCr), treatment-emergent adverse events, dose delays and treatment discontinuations associated with impaired renal function. RESULTS: Creatinine clearance ≥45 mL/min was required before the start of any cycle. Patients on pemetrexed maintenance had a significantly higher percentage maximum increase in sCr over baseline versus placebo for the range of ≥10% to ≥90% increase (p < .05). The risk of experiencing renal events leading to dose delays and discontinuations was higher with higher increases in sCr but reversible in most patients. sCr increases of ≥30% and ≥40% were associated with gender (female), age (<70 years) and longer exposure to pemetrexed compared with placebo. Sixteen (4%) pemetrexed patients and 1 (1%) placebo patient discontinued treatment due to drug-related renal events; 13/16 (81%) of those pemetrexed patients had sCr increases ≥30% and 7/13 (54%) had pre-existing conditions and/or were receiving nephrotoxic drugs. CONCLUSIONS: The appearance of renal events leading to dose delays and/or treatment discontinuations was associated with sCr increase of at least 30%. However, it was difficult to identify patients at a higher risk of treatment discontinuation due to a drug-related renal event based only on changes in pre-maintenance laboratory values.

Pemetrexed therapy in elderly patients with good performance status: analysis of two phase III trials of patients with nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: A widely held misperception contends that all elderly patients, even those with good performance status (PS 0-1), are unable to tolerate aggressive chemotherapy. The objective of these analyses was to evaluate the survival and safety of treatment with pemetrexed in elderly patients with nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and PS 0-1. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two randomized studies, 1 reporting the activity of pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin vs. cisplatin and gemcitabine in chemotherapy-naive patients (N = 1725) and another comparing single-agent pemetrexed with placebo in the maintenance setting (N = 663) were retrospectively considered. Data from patients with nonsquamous advanced NSCLC with PS 0-1 in these studies were evaluated in 2 separate dichotomous analyses (< 65 years and ≥ 65 years and < 70 years and ≥ 70). Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate covariate-adjusted between-arm hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals for each age group. RESULTS: In the first-line study, 32.7% of the 1252 patients with nonsquamous NSCLC were ≥ 65 years and 12.8% were ≥ 70 years old. In the maintenance study, 33.1% of the 481 patients with nonsquamous NSCLC were ≥ 65 years and 16.0% were ≥ 70 years old. In both studies, the adjusted HRs for overall survival (range, 0.62-0.89) favored pemetrexed and were similar between the older and younger age groups. Dose intensity delivered and toxicities observed for patients treated with pemetrexed were manageable and similar between the older and younger age groups. CONCLUSIONS: For elderly patients with nonsquamous advanced NSCLC and PS 0-1, pemetrexed therapy, with its favorable toxicity profile, is a viable option, either in combination with cisplatin in the first-line setting or as maintenance therapy after initial chemotherapy.

Pemetrexed plus cisplatin or pemetrexed plus carboplatin for chemonaïve patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: results of the International Expanded Access Program.

INTRODUCTION: Previously published results from a randomized phase III study of pemetrexed plus cisplatin in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) demonstrated a significant survival benefit and higher response rate compared with cisplatin. Although pemetrexed was under review by regulatory agencies, an International Expanded Access Program (EAP) provided more than 3000 mesothelioma patients with access to single-agent pemetrexed or pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin or carboplatin in 13 countries. This manuscript reports the safety and efficacy data from the nonrandomized open-label study in chemonaïve patients receiving pemetrexed plus platinum under the EAP. METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed MPM, not amenable to curative surgery, received pemetrexed 500 mg/m in combination with either cisplatin 75 mg/m or carboplatin AUC 5, once every 21 days with standard premedication. Efficacy data were recorded at the end of study participation. RESULTS: A total of 1704 chemonaïve patients received pemetrexed plus cisplatin (n = 843) or pemetrexed plus carboplatin (n = 861) and were evaluated for safety. The efficacy evaluable population consisted of 745 patients in the pemetrexed plus cisplatin group and 752 patients in the pemetrexed plus carboplatin group for whom physician-reported tumor response was available. The pemetrexed plus cisplatin group demonstrated a response rate of 26.3% compared with 21.7% for the pemetrexed plus carboplatin group, with similar 1-year survival rates (63.1% versus 64.0%) and median time to progressive disease (7 months versus 6.9 months). The most common grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was neutropenia in 23.9% of the pemetrexed plus cisplatin group and 36.1% of the pemetrexed plus carboplatin group. CONCLUSION: This large EAP confirmed the activity of pemetrexed plus cisplatin and pemetrexed plus carboplatin in chemonaïve patients with MPM, demonstrating clinically similar time to progressive disease and 1-year survival rates.

Oral administration of gemcitabine in patients with refractory tumors: a clinical and pharmacologic study.

PURPOSE: To determine the toxicity, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary antitumor activity of oral gemcitabine (2',2'-difluorodeoxycytidine; dFdC) in patients with cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced or metastatic cancer refractory to standard therapy were eligible. Gemcitabine was administered p.o. starting at 1 mg once daily using dose escalation with three patients per dose level. Patients received one of two dosing schemes: (a) once daily dosing for 14 days of a 21-day cycle or (b) every other day dosing for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Pharmacokinetics were assessed by measuring concentrations of dFdC and 2',2'-difluorodeoxyuridine (dFdU) in plasma and gemcitabine triphosphate in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, and pharmacodynamics by measuring the effect on T-cell proliferation. RESULTS: Thirty patients entered the study. Oral gemcitabine was generally well-tolerated. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Mainly moderate gastrointestinal toxicities occurred except for one patient who died after experiencing grade 4 hepatic failure during cycle two. One patient with a leiomyosarcoma had stable disease during 2 years and 7 months. Systemic exposure to dFdC was low with an estimated bioavailability of 10%. dFdC was highly converted to dFdU, probably via first pass metabolism and dFdU had a long terminal half-life ( approximately 89 h). Concentrations of dFdCTP in peripheral blood mononuclear cells were low, but high levels of gemcitabine triphosphate, the phosphorylated metabolite of dFdU, were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Systemic exposure to oral gemcitabine was low due to extensive first-pass metabolism to dFdU. Moderate toxicity combined with hints of activity warrant further investigation of the concept of prolonged exposure to gemcitabine.

Phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of the oral protein kinase C beta-inhibitor enzastaurin in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: Enzastaurin targets the protein kinase C and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT pathways to reduce tumor angiogenesis and cell proliferation and to induce cell death. A phase I trial was conducted to evaluate the feasibility of combining enzastaurin with gemcitabine and cisplatin. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced cancer received a 14-day lead-in treatment with oral enzastaurin followed by subsequent 21-day cycles of daily enzastaurin, gemcitabine on days 1 and 8, and cisplatin on day 1. Enzastaurin doses were escalated between 350 mg once daily to 500 mg twice daily, whereas gemcitabine doses were either 1,000 or 1,250 mg/m(2) and cisplatin doses were either 60 or 75 mg/m(2). Circulating endothelial cell numbers and CD146 and CD133 mRNA expression were evaluated as pharmacodynamic markers. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients (median age, 58 years) were enrolled in seven dose levels. The maximum tolerated dose was not identified. Two dose-limiting toxicities (grade 2 QT interval corrected for heart rate prolongation and grade 3 fatigue) were reported. Other toxicities included grade 3/4 neutropenia (3 of 6 patients), thrombocytopenia (1 of 6 patients), grade 3 leukopenia (2 patients), and fatigue (5 patients). Enzastaurin twice daily (> or =250 mg) resulted in more discontinuations and low-grade toxicities. In the combination, enzastaurin exposures decreased slightly but remained above the target of 1,400 nmol/L, whereas gemcitabine/cisplatin exposures were unaltered. Three patients (9.1%) had partial responses and 13 (39.4%) had stable disease. Measurement of circulating endothelial cell numbers and CD146 and CD133 mRNA expression did not contribute to decision-making on dose escalation. CONCLUSIONS: Recommended phase II dose is 500 mg enzastaurin once daily, 1,250 mg/m(2) gemcitabine, and 75 mg/m(2) cisplatin. This regimen is well tolerated with no significant alterations in the pharmacokinetic variables of any drug.