Are you Giuseppe Nettis?

Claim your profile

Publications (4)43.46 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A number of second line treatments have been proposed in patients with advanced pretreated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, either single agents or two or three drug combinations achieved very poor results with no superiority of any combination over monotherapy. We have treated 42 patients (30 males) affected by advanced/metastatic NSCLC progressing during front line cisplatin-based chemotherapy with a combination of topotecan (1.2 mg/m2) plus ifosfamide (1200 mg/m2) for 3 consecutive days every 3 weeks. The median age was 63 years (range 43-76); cell types were: squamous carcinoma (n=17), adenocarcinoma (n=16), large cell carcinoma (n=3), broncho-alveolar carcinoma (n=2) and undifferentiated carcinoma (n=4). All patients were treated with a platinum containing chemotherapy: 39 patients with cisplatin, 2 patients with carboplatin and 1 patient with oxaliplatin, respectively. The ECOG PS was 0 in 8 patients (19%), 1 in 11 patients (26%), and 2 in 23 patients (55%). The median number of courses administered was 3 (range 1-8). Grade 3-4 neutropenia was the dose limiting toxicity, observed in 36% of patients. Moreover, grade 3-4 anemia and thrombocytopenia were observed in 17% and in 12% of patients, respectively. One PS 2 patient died of grade 4 hematological toxicity after the first cycle. No complete response was observed. Six (14.2%) subjects obtained a partial response (PR). In addition, 1 (2.4%) minimal response (MR) plus 14 (34%) stable diseases (SD) and 21 (51%) progressive diseases (PD) were observed. Median time to disease progression and median survival were 9 weeks (range 1-13) and 26 weeks (range 1-91+), respectively. The 1-year survival rate was 14%. Combination of topotecan and ifosfamide demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with relapsing or refractory NCSLC with a modest side effect profile and an overall disease control (PR + MR + SD) of 50.7%. Nevertheless, the still low response rate and the shortness of median survival indicates the need for more effective second line treatments in this disease.
    Oncology Reports 01/2006; 14(6):1547-51. · 2.30 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To study the prognostic value for overall survival of baseline assessment of functional status, comorbidity, and quality of life (QoL) in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy. Data from 566 patients enrolled onto the phase III randomized Multicenter Italian Lung Cancer in the Elderly Study (MILES) study were analyzed. Functional status was measured as activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental ADL (IADL). The presence of comorbidity was assessed with a checklist of 33 items; items 29 and 30 of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core questionnaire QLQ-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) were used to estimate QoL. ADL was dichotomized as none versus one or more dependency. For IADL and QoL, three categories were defined using first and third quartiles as cut points. Comorbidity was summarized using the Charlson scale. Analysis was performed by Cox model, and stratified by treatment arm. Better values of baseline QoL (P = .0003) and IADL (P = .04) were significantly associated with better prognosis, whereas ADL (P = .44) and Charlson score (P = .66) had no prognostic value. Performance status 2 (P = .006) and a higher number of metastatic sites (P = .02) also predicted shorter overall survival. Pretreatment global QoL and IADL scores, but not ADL and comorbidity, have significant prognostic value for survival of elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who were treated with chemotherapy. Using these scores in clinical practice might improve prognostic prediction for treatment planning.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 11/2005; 23(28):6865-72. · 18.04 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We performed this phase III study to compare the irinotecan, leucovorin (LV), and fluorouracil (FU) regimen (FOLFIRI) versus the oxaliplatin, LV, and FU regimen (FOLFOX4) in previously untreated patients with advanced colorectal cancer. A total of 360 chemotherapy-naive patients were randomly assigned to receive, every 2 weeks, either arm A (FOLFIRI: irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) on day 1 with LV 100 mg/m(2) administered as a 2-hour infusion before FU 400 mg/m(2) administered as an intravenous bolus injection, and FU 600 mg/m(2) as a 22-hour infusion immediately after FU bolus injection on days 1 and 2 [LV5FU2]) or arm B (FOLFOX4: oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on day 1 with LV5FU2 regimen). One hundred sixty-four and 172 patients were assessable in arm A and B, respectively. Overall response rates (ORR) were 31% in arm A (95% CI, 24.6% to 38.3%) and 34% in arm B (95% CI, 27.2% to 41.5%; P = .60). In both arms A and B, median time to progression (TTP; 7 v 7 months, respectively), duration of response (9 v 10 months, respectively), and overall survival (OS; 14 v 15 months, respectively) were similar, without any statistically significant difference. Toxicity was mild in both groups: alopecia and gastrointestinal disturbances were the most common toxicities in arm A; thrombocytopenia and neurosensorial were the most common toxicities in arm B. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were uncommon in both arms, and no statistical significant difference was observed. There is no difference in ORR, TTP, and OS for patients treated with the FOLFIRI or FOLFOX4 regimen. Both therapies seemed effective as first-line treatment in these patients. The difference between these two combination therapies is mainly in the toxicity profile.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 09/2005; 23(22):4866-75. · 18.04 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 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.
    British Journal of Cancer 10/2003; 89(6):1013-21. · 5.08 Impact Factor