Search

Introduction: Treatment of elderly patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is based on scanty evidence. Methods: Patients with extensive SCLC, age >70 years, and performance status 0-2 were eligible for a study looking for optimal two-drug combination of gemcitabine (Gem) with vinorelbine (Vin), etoposide (Eto), cisplatin (Cis), or carboplatin (Car). Gemcitabine dose was the same (1000 mg/m2, days 1-8) in all combinations. A two-stage minimax flexible design for response was applied to GemVin combination (Vin 25 mg/m2, days 1-8). For GemCar, GemCis, GemEto, a phase I-II Bayesian design was applied, looking for the optimal dose of the partner drugs. Objective response rate ≥60% and unacceptable toxicity ≤25% were required to define a combination worthy of further studies. Results: Median age of 78 eligible patients was 74 years. GemVin produced a 36.7% objective response rate. GemEto and GemCis arms were found not sufficiently active. GemCar produced 16 responses (14 with area under the curve [AUC] 3.5 and 2 with AUC 4.0) in 26 patients (61.5%) and 6 cases of unacceptable toxicity (3 at each Car dose). Conclusions: In elderly patients with extensive SCLC, GemVin, GemEto, and GemCis are not enough active and do not merit further studies. Gem plus Car might deserve further attention. © 2011 by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

Purpose: Lonidamine (LND) can enhance the activity of anthracyclines in patients with metastatic breast cancer. A multicenter, prospective, randomized trial was designed to determine whether the association of LND with high-dose epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide (EC) could improve disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with early breast cancer (BC) compared with EC alone. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) was added to maintain the EC dose-intensity. Patients and Methods: From October 1991 to April 1994, 506 patients with stage I/II BC were randomly assigned to four groups: (A) epirubicin 120 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 administered intravenously on day 1 every 21 days for four cycles (124 patients); (B) EC plus LND 450 mg/d administered orally (125 patients); (C) EC plus G-CSF administered subcutaneously (129 patients); (D) EC plus LND plus G-CSF (128 patients). Results: Median follow-up was 55 months. Five-year DFS rate was similar for LND (B+D groups; 69.6%) versus non-LND arms (A+C groups; 70.3%) and G-CSF (C+D groups; 67.2%) versus non–G-CSF arms (A+B groups; 72.9%). Five-year overall survival (OS) was comparable in LND (79.1%) versus non-LND arms (81.3%) and in G-CSF (80.6%) versus non–G-CSF arms (79.6%). DFS and OS distributions in LND and G-CSF arms did not change according to tumor size, node, receptor, and menopausal status. G-CSF dramatically reduced hematologic toxicity without having a significant impact on dose-intensity (98.1% v 95.5% for C+D and A+B groups, respectively). Conclusion: EC is active and well tolerated in patients with early breast cancer. The addition of LND or G-CSF does not improve DFS or OS.

The present study describes supportive care (SC) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), evaluating whether it is affected by concomitant chemotherapy, patient's performance status (PS) and age. Data of patients enrolled in three randomised trials of first-line chemotherapy, conducted between 1996 and 2001, were pooled. The analysis was limited to the first three cycles of treatment. Supportive care data were available for 1185 out of 1312 (90%) enrolled patients. Gastrointestinal drugs (45.7%), corticosteroids (33.4%) and analgesics (23.8%) were the most frequently observed categories. The mean number of drugs per patient was 2.43; 538 patients (45.4%) assumed three or more supportive drugs. Vinorelbine does not produce substantial variations in the SC pattern, while cisplatin-based treatment requires an overall higher number of supportive drugs, with higher use of antiemetics (41 vs 27%) and antianaemics (10 vs 4%). Patients with worse PS are more exposed to corticosteroids (42 vs 30%). Elderly patients require drugs against concomitant diseases significantly more than adults (20 vs 7%) and are less frequently exposed to antiemetics (12 vs 27%). In conclusion, polypharmacotherapy is a relevant issue in patients with advanced NSCLC. Chemotherapy does not remarkably affect the pattern of SC, except for some drugs against side effects. Elderly patients assume more drugs for concomitant diseases and receive less antiemetics than adults.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors are widely used to reduce myelotoxicity of chemotherapy and to allow its regular administration. National and international guidelines regulate their use. The aim of the study was to evaluate the use of pegfilgrastim and filgrastim/lenograstim in clinical practice, adherence to ASCO and ESMO guidelines, chemotherapy-related complications and adverse reactions.Data from 645 consecutive patients and 3,150 chemotherapy administrations, receiving granulocyte colony-stimulating factors, as primary/secondary prophylaxis or therapeutic use, for the first time during a line of chemotherapy, were recorded from 08/2008 to 08/2011, in 10 Lombardy Italian cancer centers. Patients and chemotherapy administrations data were examined in a multiple logistic regression analysis model.Adherence to guidelines: primary prophylaxis, pegfilgrastim and filgrastim/ lenograstim 66%/47% (P = 0.002); secondary prophylaxis, 19.0%/26.8%; but 56.8%/ 53.6% including patients at high risk of febrile neutropenia with grade 3-4 neutropenia. Correct timing start (administration 24-72 h after chemotherapy): pegfilgrastim and filgrastim/lenograstim, 93.2%/61.5% (P0.0001).Results suggest the more correct administration of pegfilgrastim as primary prophylaxis and timing start, compared to filgrastim/lenograstim. In secondary prophylaxis, the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors is extended beyond guideline recommendations to support patients at high risk of febrile neutropenia and to guarantee dose intensity. These outcomes suggest both the need of educational activities and the development of predictive tools to better define high risk patients and the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors.

Introduction Non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is predominantly a disease of the elderly population. Over the past few years, immunotherapy with monoclonal antibodies named checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) greatly improved the clinical management of a significant proportion of patients with metastatic NSCLC. However, pivotal trials excluded older patients, although, given the favorable clinical profile of ICIs, this treatment may be revealed to be a most valuable option also for these patients. To this aim, a multicenter retrospective analysis was performed on patients aged ≥ 75 years with NSCLC treated with anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunotherapy. Material and Methods Inclusion criteria were: diagnosis of locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC (stage IIIB or IV, according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) classification system, version 8.0); age ≥ 75 years; treatment with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies in first or subsequent lines of treatment; absence of epidermal growth factor receptor-activating mutations or anaplastic lymphoma kinase and ROS-1 rearrangements. The primary endpoints of the study were the efficacy, in terms of overall response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival, and safety, by means of evaluations of the incidence of immune-related adverse events. Results Eighty-six patients were considered for the final analysis; 71 (82.6%) were male. The mean age was 78.5 years (range, 75-86 years; SD, 3.12 years). Of the 86 patients, 69 (80.2%) of patients had a performance status of 0 or 1. The overall median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (range 1-36 months; SD, 7.5 months,) whereas the median overall survival was 10.1 months (range, 1.7-34.8 months; SD, 8 months). At the Cox regression analysis, the only parameter significantly associated with survival was the smoking status (P = .008). No difference in survival was found between patients younger and older than 80 years. Conclusions In the present real-world retrospective cohort, efficacy and toxicity profiles of ICIs in older patients with advanced NSCLC were comparable with those observed in younger patients enrolled in clinical trials.

Purpose To test the efficacy of adding cisplatin to first-line treatment for elderly patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) within a combined analysis of two parallel phase III trials, MILES-3 and MILES-4. Patients and Methods Patients with advanced NSCLC who were older than age 70 years with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1 were randomly assigned to gemcitabine or pemetrexed, without or with cisplatin. In each trial, 382 events were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of death of 0.75, with 80% power and two-tailed α of .05. Trials were closed prematurely because of slow accrual, but the joint database allowed us to analyze the efficacy of cisplatin on the basis of intention-to-treat and adjusted by trial, histotype, non-platinum companion drug, stage, performance status, sex, age, and size of the study center. Results From March 2011 to August 2016, 531 patients (MILES-3, 299; MILES-4, 232) were assigned to gemcitabine or pemetrexed without (n = 268) or with cisplatin (n = 263). Median age was 75 years, 79% were male, and 70% had nonsquamous histology. At a median 2-year follow-up, 384 deaths and 448 progression-free survival events were recorded. Overall survival was not significantly prolonged with cisplatin (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.05; P = .14) and global health status score of quality of life was not improved, whereas progression-free survival (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.92; P = .005) and objective response rate (15.5% v 8.5%; P = .02) were significantly better. Significantly more severe hematologic toxicity, fatigue, and anorexia were found with cisplatin. Conclusion The addition of cisplatin to single-agent chemotherapy does not significantly prolong overall survival, and it does not improve global health status score of quality of life in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC.

Background Platinum-based chemotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, but the efficacy of adding cisplatin to single-agent chemotherapy remains to be demonstrated in prospective phase III trials dedicated to elderly patients. Furthermore, the superiority of cisplatin/pemetrexed over cisplatin/gemcitabine in non-squamous NSCLC has not been confirmed prospectively. We present the rationale and design of two open-label, multicenter, randomized phase III trials for elderly patients with advanced NSCLC∶ Multicenter Italian Lung cancer in the Elderly Study (MILES)-3 and MILES-4. The aim is to evaluate the efficacy of adding cisplatin to single-agent chemotherapy (both trials) and the efficacy of pemetrexed versus gemcitabine in non-squamous tumors (MILES-4). Patients and Methods Both trials are dedicated to first-line therapy of patients older than 70 years with advanced NSCLC, ECOG performance status 0-1. In the MILES-3 trial, patients are randomized in a 1∶1 ratio to gemcitabine or cisplatin/gemcitabine. In the MILES-4 study patients with non-squamous histology are randomized, in a factorial design with 1∶1∶1∶1 ratio, to four arms: gemcitabine (A), cisplatin/gemcitabine (B), pemetrexed (C), cisplatin/pemetrexed (D). Two comparisons are planned∶ A+C vs B+D to test the role of cisplatin; A+B vs C+D to test the role of pemetrexed. Primary endpoint of both trials is overall survival. Secondary and exploratory endpoints include progression-free survival, response rate, toxicity, and quality of life. Conclusions MILES-3 and MILES-4 results will add important evidence about the role of cisplatin-based doublets and pemetrexed in the first-line therapy of elderly patients with advanced NSCLC.

The clinical activity of rituximab has been evaluated in a phase 2 study in both untreated and relapsed mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphomas. Treatment consisted of 4 standard (375 mg/m(2)) weekly doses. Thirty-five patients were enrolled, and 34 completed the treatment program. The primary lymphoma location was stomach in 15 patients, and extragastric in 20. Eleven patients had previously been treated with chemotherapy. At study entry 12 patients had Ann Arbor stage I-E, 3 had stage IIE, and 20 had stage IV disease. The overall response rate was 73% (95% confidence interval, 56%-87%), with 15 complete responses and 10 partial responses, and the response rate was significantly higher in the chemotherapy-naive patients, who had an 87% response rate compared with 45% of the previously treated patients (P = .03). The median response duration was 10.5 months. At a median follow-up of 15 months, 9 patients (26%) relapsed. The median time to treatment failure was 14.2 months in the whole series, but it was significantly longer (22 versus 12 months) in the chemotherapy-naive patients compared with those who had prior chemotherapy (P = .001). most adverse events were of mild to moderate severity with no grade 4 toxicity. This study indicates that rituximab is safe with significant activity in MALT lymphomas. (C) 2003 by The American Society of Hematology.

Purpose Two phase I/II trials were done to evaluate the feasibility of cisplatin combined with gemcitabine or vinorelbine in elderly patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Patients with advanced NSCLC who were older than 70 years of age and who had a performance status of 0 to 1 were eligible. Cisplatin was given on day 1 (a starting dose of 50 mg/m2 with increasing increments of 10 mg/m2 at each level) and gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) or vinorelbine (25 mg/m2) on days 1 and 8. Cycles were repeated every 21 days. A two-stage flexible optimal design was applied in the phase II study, and unacceptable toxicity was the primary end point. Results Overall, 159 patients were enrolled: 38 in phase I and 121 in phase II studies. Cisplatin was feasible at 60 mg/m2 with gemcitabine and at 40 mg/m2 with vinorelbine. With the former combination, 50 of 60 (83.3%) patients were treated without unacceptable toxicity; objective responses were reported in 26 of 60 patients (43.5%; 95% CI, 30.6 to 56.8); median progression-free and overall survivals were 25.3 and 43.6 weeks, respectively. With the latter combination, 50 (82.0%) of 61 patients were treated without unacceptable toxicity; objective responses were reported in 22 of 61 patients (36.1%; 95% CI, 24.2 to 49.4); median progression-free and overall survivals were 21.1 and 33.1 weeks, respectively. Conclusion Both cisplatin (60 mg/m2) plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (40 mg/m2) plus vinorelbine are feasible and active in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. The former combination, which provides a higher dose of cisplatin, deserves comparison versus single-agent chemotherapy in this setting of patients.