Article

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma.

Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Humanitas Clinical Institute of Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Cancer (Impact Factor: 5.2). 05/2008; 112(7):1555-61. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23337
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Pemetrexed-cisplatin chemotherapy is the standard of care in the first-line treatment of unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Second-line cytotoxic therapy is considered for a growing group of patients, but the optimal treatment has not been defined to date. Gemcitabine and vinorelbine have shown activity in the first-line setting. The objective of this study was to evaluate the activity and toxicity of the gemcitabine-vinorelbine combination in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with MPM.
From January 2004 to September 2006, 30 consecutive patients who were pretreated with pemetrexed with or without a platinum-derivative were enrolled. Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) were administered intravenously on Days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. Treatment was repeated for a maximum of 6 cycles or until progression or unacceptable toxicity.
A partial response was observed in 3 patients (10%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-26.5%), and 10 patients (33.3%; 95% CI, 17.3-52.8%) had stable disease after treatment. Overall, 13 patients (43.3%; 95% CI, 25.5-62.6%) achieved disease control. The median time to progression was 2.8 months (range, 0.6-12.1 months), and the median survival was 10.9 months (range, 0.8-25.3 months). Hematologic toxicity was acceptable, with grade 3 or 4 neutropenia occurring in 11% of patients and thrombocytopenia occurring in 4% of patients; no case of febrile neutropenia was observed. Nonhematologic toxicity generally was mild.
The gemcitabine and vinorelbine combination was moderately active and had an acceptable toxicity profile in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with MPM. The role of second-line treatment in MPM needs to be evaluated in prospective trials in large series of patients who are stratified according to previous treatment and prognostic factors.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
83 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM) is a locally aggressive disease with a poor prognosis. After failure of first line platinum-based chemotherapy, there is no widely approved salvage regimen. New strategies for treatment are needed and phase 1 trials appear as a rationale alternative. Materials and Methods MPM patients were enrolled in 20 different phase 1 trials between March 2005 and January 2012, and their data analysed retrospectively. The primary endpoint was response rate and secondary endpoints were toxicity profile, Overall Survival (OS) and Progression Free Survival (PFS). OS and PFS were estimated using Kaplan-Meier and their association with baseline characteristics was investigated through a log-rank test. The drugs described were divided into 5 groups based on their mechanism of action. Results Forty-five patients were analyzed with a median follow up of 20.5 months. The best tumor response was as follows: 4% of patients had a RECIST partial response, 60% had stable disease, 24% had progressive disease and 11% were not evaluable. Grade ≥3 toxicities were observed in 19 (42%) patients. Median OS and PFS were estimated to 6 months (95% CI= [4.2-10.5]) and 2 months (95% CI= [1.3-2.7]), respectively. The cellular motility inhibitors group appeared as the most promising class to be developed in a phase 2 setting. Conclusion Including MPM patients in phase I trials beyond first line of treatment can result in modest clinical benefits with an acceptable toxicity profile. Several molecular pathways involved in MPM have been identified and further novel biologic therapies (are =deleted) need to be tested.
    Lung Cancer. 01/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pemetrexed-platinum chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment of unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). At progression, patients are generally selected to experimental trials, when available, or, in every-day clinical practice, they are offered second-line chemotherapy. The optimal treatment has not yet been defined. The aim of this retrospective, single-center study was to evaluate the activity and toxicity of vinorelbine administered to a consecutive series of pemetrexed-pretreated MPM patients. Vinorelbine 25mg/m(2) was administered intravenously as a single agent on days 1, 8 every three weeks, either as second-line (2L) or further-line (>2L) therapy. Treatment was repeated for a maximum of 6 cycles, until progression, or unacceptable toxicity. Fifty-nine patients were included in this analysis. Vinorelbine was given to 34 patients as 2L, and to 25 as >2L treatment. The median age was 69 years (range 45-80). Forty-two patients (71.2%) had a good EORTC prognostic score. Partial response was observed in 9 (15.2%) cases, stable disease in 20 (33.9%). The overall disease control rate (DCR) was 49.1%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.3 and 6.2 months, respectively. ECOG performance status (PS) (HR0 vs. 1-2 0.50; 95%CI: 0.3-0.8; p=0.014) and PFS≥6 months following first-line (FL) chemotherapy (HRFL-PFS>6ms vs. <6ms 0.50; 95%CI: 0.3-0.9; p=0.031) were significantly associated to OS in multivariate analysis. No difference was observed in terms of DCR, PFS, and OS in relation to age, histology, sex, line of vinorelbine therapy, or response to FL treatment. Hematological toxicity was acceptable, with grade 3/4 neutropenia occurring in 5 (8.4%) patients, and there were no cases of febrile neutropenia. The main non-hematological toxicities were grade 2 fatigue in 17 (28.8%) and constipation in 7 (11.8%) patients. Vinorelbine was moderately active in pemetrexed-pretreated MPM patients, with an acceptable toxicity profile, particularly in patients with ECOG-PS0 and FL-PFS ≥6 months.
    Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 11/2013; · 3.14 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of second-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens on overall survival (OS) in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients receiving first-line pemetrexed-based regimens. A total of 73 patients with MPM from Akdeniz University, Acibadem Kayseri Hospital, Kayseri Training and Research Hospital, and Erciyes University were analyzed and evaluated retrospectively as two groups: second-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and no second-line chemotherapy. The median OS of patients who received second-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy was 11.3 (5.1-17.5) months, while it was 9.9 (2.1-17.7) months in the patients who did not receive chemotherapy in the second-line setting (p = 0.056). When we evaluated the survival rate at the 6th, 12th, 18th, 24th, and 36th month, the OS rate of the 36th month was significantly higher in patients who received gemcitabine-based second-line chemotherapy (p = 0.041). When evaluating the OS from diagnosis to death, the median OS values were 20.8 (17.5-24.1) months for first-line pemetrexed-based regimens then second-line gemcitabine alone and 13.1 (9.0-17.1) months supportive care after first-line pemetrexed-based regimens (p = 0.005). According to our results, we may consider gemcitabine-based regimens as second-line chemotherapy after treatment with pemetrexed plus platinum in patients with MPM.
    Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England). 08/2014; 31(8):74.

Full-text

View
0 Downloads