-
R Pirker,
J R Pereira,
A Szczesna,
J von Pawel, M Krzakowski,
R Ramlau,
I Vynnychenko,
K Park,
W E E Eberhardt,
F de Marinis,
S Heeger,
T Goddemeier,
K J O'Byrne,
U Gatzemeier
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The FLEX study demonstrated that the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the FLEX intention to treat (ITT) population, we investigated the prognostic significance of particular baseline characteristics. Individual patient data from the treatment arms of the ITT population of the FLEX study were combined. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models were used to investigate variables with potential prognostic value. The ITT population comprised 1125 patients. In the univariable analysis, longer median survival times were apparent for females compared with males (12.7 vs 9.3 months); patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0 compared with 1 compared with 2 (13.5 vs 10.6 vs 5.9 months); never smokers compared with former smokers compared with current smokers (14.6 vs 11.1 vs 9.0); Asians compared with Caucasians (19.5 vs 9.6 months); patients with adenocarcinoma compared with squamous cell carcinoma (12.4 vs 9.3 months) and those with metastases to one site compared with two sites compared with three or more sites (12.4 months vs 9.8 months vs 6.4 months). Age (<65 vs ≥65 years), tumor stage (IIIB with pleural effusion vs IV) and percentage of tumor cells expressing EGFR (<40% vs ≥40%) were not identified as possible prognostic factors in relation to survival time. In multivariable analysis, a stepwise selection procedure identified age (<65 vs ≥65 years), gender, ECOG PS, smoking status, region, tumor histology, and number of organs involved as independent factors of prognostic value. In summary, in patients with advanced NSCLC enrolled in the FLEX study, and consistent with previous analyses, particular patient and disease characteristics at baseline were shown to be independent factors of prognostic value. The FLEX study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00148798.
Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 04/2012; 77(2):376-82. · 3.14 Impact Factor
-
T Brodowicz,
T Ciuleanu,
J Crawford,
M Filipits,
J R Fischer,
V Georgoulias,
C Gridelli,
F R Hirsch,
J Jassem,
P Kosmidis, M Krzakowski,
Ch Manegold,
J L Pujol,
R Stahel,
N Thatcher,
J Vansteenkiste,
C Minichsdorfer,
S Zöchbauer-Müller,
R Pirker,
C C Zielinski
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The current third consensus on the systemic treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) builds upon and updates similar publications on the subject by the Central European Cooperative Oncology Group (CECOG), which has published such consensus statements in the years 2002 and 2005 (Zielinski CC, Beinert T, Crawford J et al. Consensus on medical treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer--update 2004. Lung Cancer 2005; 50: 129-137). The principle of all CECOG consensus is such that evidence-based recommendations for state-of-the-art treatment are given upon which all participants and authors of the manuscript have to agree (Beslija S, Bonneterre J, Burstein HJ et al. Third consensus on medical treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2009; 20 (11): 1771-1785). This is of particular importance in diseases in which treatment options depend on very particular clinical and biologic variables (Zielinski CC, Beinert T, Crawford J et al. Consensus on medical treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer--update 2004. Lung Cancer 2005; 50: 129-137; Beslija S, Bonneterre J, Burstein HJ et al. Third consensus on medical treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2009; 20 (11): 1771-1785). Since the publication of the last CECOG consensus on the medical treatment of NSCLC, a series of diagnostic tools for the characterization of biomarkers for personalized therapy for NSCLC as well as therapeutic options including adjuvant treatment, targeted therapy, and maintenance treatment have emerged and strongly influenced the field. Thus, the present third consensus was generated that not only readdresses previous disease-related issues but also expands toward recent developments in the management of NSCLC. It is the aim of the present consensus to summarize minimal quality-oriented requirements for individual patients with NSCLC in its various stages based upon levels of evidence in the light of a rapidly expanding array of individual therapeutic options.
Annals of Oncology 09/2011; 23(5):1223-9. · 6.43 Impact Factor
-
C Manegold,
N van Zandwijk,
A Szczesna,
P Zatloukal,
J S K Au,
M Blasinska-Morawiec,
P Serwatowski, M Krzakowski,
J Jassem,
E H Tan,
R J Benner,
A Ingrosso,
S J Meech,
D Readett,
N Thatcher
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This open-label phase III study assessed the addition of Toll-like receptor 9-activating oligodeoxynucleotide PF-3512676 to gemcitabine/cisplatin chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
Chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were randomized (1:1) to receive six or fewer 3-week cycles of i.v. gemcitabine (1250 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8) and cisplatin alone (75 mg/m2 on day 1, control arm) or combined with s.c. PF-3512676 0.2 mg/kg on days 8 and 15 of each chemotherapy cycle and weekly thereafter until progression or unacceptable toxicity (experimental arm). No crossover was planned. The primary end point was overall survival (OS).
A total of 839 patients were randomized. Baseline demographics were well balanced. Median OS (11.0 versus 10.7 months; P=0.98) and median progression-free survival (PFS) (both 5.1 months) were similar between groups. Grade≥3 hematologic adverse events (AEs), injection-site reactions, and influenza-like symptoms were more frequently reported among patients receiving PF-3512676. At the first-interim analysis, the Data Safety Monitoring Committee recommended study discontinuation. Administration of PF-3512676 was halted based on efficacy futility and increased grade≥3 AEs (experimental arm).
Addition of PF-3512676 to gemcitabine/cisplatin chemotherapy did not improve OS or PFS but did increase toxicity.
Annals of Oncology 04/2011; 23(1):72-7. · 6.43 Impact Factor
-
E H Tan,
A Szczesna, M Krzakowski,
H N Macha,
U Gatzemeier,
K Mattson,
M Wernli,
P Reiterer,
R Hui,
J Von Pawel,
O Bertetto,
J C Pouget,
J P Burillon,
Y Parlier,
R Abratt
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The objective of this trial was to compare two vinorelbine-based doublets with carboplatin (CBDCA-VC) or with gemcitabine (VG) in patients with stage IIIB-IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
A total of 316 patients with advanced NSCLC previously untreated were randomized to either vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2) D1,8 with carboplatin AUC 5 D1 (VC) or vinorelbine 25mg/m(2) with gemcitabine (VG) 1000 mg/m(2) both given D1,8 every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was response rate with secondary parameters being survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), tolerance and clinical benefit.
The median number of cycles was four in each arm with a total of 1268 cycles. The objective response (OR) on intent-to-treat was 20.8% in VC and 28% in VG (p=0.15). Median PFS was 3.9 months in VC and 4.4 months (mo) in VG (p=0.18). Median survival was significantly longer (p=0.01) for VG with 11.5 mo compared to 8.6 mo in VC with 1 year survival at 48.9 and 34.4%, respectively. Tolerance was better in the VG arm as compared to the VC patients. Four toxic deaths were recorded in the VC group. Clinical benefit response rate was 32.4% compared to 40.9% in 111 and 110 evaluable patients in VC and VG, respectively.
VG compared to VC resulted in a similar overall response rate, favourable median survival and a better toxicity profile. For non-cisplatin-based chemotherapy, VG is a useful alternative.
Lung Cancer 09/2005; 49(2):233-40. · 3.43 Impact Factor
-
Lee S Rosen,
David Gordon,
Simon Tchekmedyian,
Ronald Yanagihara,
Vera Hirsh, M Krzakowski,
M Pawlicki,
Paul de Souza,
Ming Zheng,
Gladys Urbanowitz,
Dirk Reitsma,
John J Seaman
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To assess the efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid in patients with bone metastases secondary to solid tumors other than breast or prostate cancer.
Patients were randomly assigned to receive zoledronic acid (4 or 8 mg) or placebo every 3 weeks for 9 months, with concomitant antineoplastic therapy. The 8-mg dose was reduced to 4 mg (8/4-mg group). The primary efficacy analysis was proportion of patients with at least one skeletal-related event (SRE), defined as pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, radiation therapy to bone, and surgery to bone. Secondary analyses (time to first SRE, skeletal morbidity rate, and multiple event analysis) counted hypercalcemia as an SRE.
Among 773 patients with bone metastases from lung cancer or other solid tumors, the proportion with an SRE was reduced in both zoledronic acid groups compared with the placebo group (38% for 4 mg and 35% for 8/4 mg zoledronic acid v 44% for the placebo group; P =.127 and P =.023 for 4-mg and 8/4-mg groups, respectively). Additionally, 4 mg zoledronic acid significantly increased time to first event (median, 230 v 163 days for placebo; P =.023), an important end point in this poor-prognosis population, and significantly reduced the risk of developing skeletal events by multiple event analysis (hazard ratio = 0.732; P =.017). Zoledronic acid was well tolerated; the most common adverse events in all treatment groups included bone pain, nausea, anemia, and vomiting.
Zoledronic acid (4 mg infused over 15 minutes) is the first bisphosphonate to reduce skeletal complications in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors other than breast and prostate cancer.
Journal of Clinical Oncology 09/2003; 21(16):3150-7. · 18.37 Impact Factor
-
Ejc Supplements - EJC SUPPL. 01/2003; 1(5).
-
J Jassem,
R Ramlau,
H Karnicka-Młodkowska,
K Krawczyk, M Krzakowski,
P Zatloukal,
E Lemarié,
W Hartmann,
L Novakova,
M O'Brien,
A Depierr
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A randomized phase II trial of oral vs. intravenous (i.v.) vinorelbine was designed to determine the efficacy and safety of oral vinorelbine with an intrapatient dose escalation in previously untreated patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
Between December 1997 and April 1999, 115 patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were randomized (2 to 1) to receive either oral vinorelbine at a dose of 60 mg/m2/week for the first three administrations and then increased to 80 mg/m2/week in the absence of severe neutropenia, or i.v. vinorelbine at 30 mg/m2/week.
One hundred and fourteen patients (76 in the oral arm and 38 in the i.v. arm) were treated. Ninety-eight patients (86%) were eligible and assessable. The two treatment arms were well-balanced for demographic and prognostic features. After external panel review, the response rates in evaluable patients were 14%, in the oral arm and 12% in the i.v. arm. The median progression-free survival with oral and i.v. vinorelbine was 3.2 months and 2.1 months, respectively, and the median survival 9.3 and 7.9 months, respectively. The most common hematological toxicity was neutropenia, which was severe (grade 3-4) in 46% of patients and for 7% of administrations in the oral arm, and in 62% of patients and for 25% of administrations in the i.v. arm. Non-hematological toxicities including nausea, vomiting, anorexia, weight loss, diarrhea .and constipation were generally mild to moderate.
The activity of oral and i.v. vinorelbine in advanced NSCLC appears to be comparable. The safety profiles of both formulations look qualitatively similar. Oral vinorelbine can therefore be considered a good alternative to i.v. administration.
Annals of Oncology 11/2001; 12(10):1375-81. · 6.43 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This was an open-label randomized Phase III study of 207 patients with either unresectable or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were treated with docetaxel plus best supportive care (BSC) or best supportive care alone. Patients in the chemotherapy arm of the study received docetaxel 100 mg/m(2) as a 1 h intravenous infusion every 21 days until they showed evidence of progressive disease, or estimated maximum benefit obtained or unacceptable side effects. Patients who received docetaxel were pretreated with oral dexamethasone. Patients in the BSC arm should not receive chemotherapy or anticancer therapy except for palliative radiotherapy. Overall survival obtained in the docetaxel arm was significantly longer than in the BSC arm (P=0.026). Two-year survival in the docetaxel arm was 12%, whereas none of the BSC patients survived after 20 months. The response rate was 13.1% (95% CI, 7.5-18.8%). There was a significantly longer time to progression in the docetaxel versus the BSC arm (P<0.001), and statistically significant improvement of clinical symptoms with docetaxel compared to BSC. The quality-of-life descriptors were in favor of docetaxel, and the difference was significant for pain, dyspnea and emotional functioning. The safety profile of docetaxel for this study was similar to that already reported in this patient population.
Lung Cancer 03/2000; 27(3):145-57. · 3.43 Impact Factor
-
A Depierre,
J Jassem,
R Ramlau,
H Karnicka-Mlodkowska,
K Krawczyck, M Krzakowski,
P Zatloukal,
E Lemarie,
W Hartmann,
L Novakova,
M O'Brien,
P His Danel
Lung Cancer. 01/2000; 29(1):35-35.
-
P Zatloukal,
E Kanitz,
P Magyar,
J Jassem, M Krzakowski,
M Pawlicki,
L Petruzelka,
L Chovan,
M Pesek,
C Janko,
K Krejcy
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The efficacy and toxicity profile of gemcitabine was evaluated in this phase II study of chemonaive patients with locally advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Eighty patients (62 males, 18 females) were entered into this study. The disease stage was IIIA in ten patients, IIIB in 32, and IV in 38 patients. The median age was 61 (range 41 - 78). Karnofsky performance status was > or = 80 in 88% of patients. All patients were chemonaive, but five patients had received prior radiotherapy and 34 patients had undergone prior surgery. Gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 was given as a 30-min intravenous infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Patients received up to nine cycles (median three cycles). Of 872 doses 815 (93%) were administered without dose delay or modification. Of the 80 patients enrolled, 76 were evaluable for efficacy analysis, and 16 patients had a partial response for an overall response rate of 21.1% (95% CI, 11.9-30.3%). A further 47 patients (61.8%) had stable disease. Partial responses were seen in eight of 41 stage III patients (19.5%) and in eight of 35 stage IV patients (22.9%). The median time to progressive disease was 4.6 months. Median survival for all 80 patients was 7.1 months. Haematological toxicity was mild with grade 3 4 neutropenia in 6.3% of patients, grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 3.8% of patients, and grade 3 anaemia in 2.5% of patients. Grade 3 non-laboratory toxicity was: somnolence (1.3% of patients), infection (1.3%), nausea and vomiting (6.4%) and dyspnoea (5.1%). This study confirms that single-agent gemcitabine is active in advanced NSCLC and its well-tolerated safety profile makes it particularly suited to outpatient use.
Lung Cancer 12/1998; 22(3):243-50. · 3.43 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A total of 530 patients were treated in this multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group study to compare the anti-emetic efficacy and safety of a once daily ondansetron oral regimen with a once daily i.v. dosing regimen over a 24 h period, administered to patients prior to receiving cisplatin (50 mg/m2 or greater) chemotherapy. Patients were randomized to receive a single dose of ondansetron plus dexamethasone given either orally (ondansetron 24 mg and dexamethasone 12 mg, n=262) or i.v. (ondansetron 8 mg and dexamethasone 20 mg, n=268). Complete control of emesis (i.e. no emetic episodes, no rescue and no premature withdrawal) was achieved for 85% of patients (224 of 262) in the oral group and 83% (223 of 268) in the i.v. group. No nausea was reported in 70% of patients in the oral group and 68% in the i.v. group. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups for any of the assessments of efficacy, which included time to first emetic episode, number of emetic episodes and the worst grade of nausea occurring over the 24 h study period. Once daily ondansetron oral and i.v., in combination with dexamethasone, was well tolerated in this study. In conclusion, once daily oral ondansetron 24 mg plus dexamethasone is equally effective in the control of emesis and nausea induced by highly emetogenic chemotherapy as once daily ondansetron 8 mg i.v. plus dexamethasone.
Anti-Cancer Drugs 09/1998; 9(7):593-8. · 2.41 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This report of a double-blind, randomized study performed to evaluate the comparative antiemetic efficacy of tropisetron (Navoban; Sandoz Pharma Ltd, Basel, Switzerland), a new 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor antagonist, focuses on treatment during stages of chemotherapy when nausea and vomiting are particularly severe. One hundred fifteen chemotherapy-naive patients with malignant disease were administered either tropisetron (n = 58) or a dexamethasone dose plus a metoclopramide dose (n = 57) during 5 days of two successive cycles of chemotherapy. Within the first 24 hours after receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy, 76% of patients in the tropisetron group remained free of vomiting (with 59% of patients free of nausea) compared with 39% of patients free of vomiting in the conventionally treated group (30% of patients free of nausea). Improved control of emesis also was observed over 4 consecutive days of follow-up in the tropisetron group. The difference in incidence of nausea and vomiting between the patient groups was statistically significant (P < .05). The efficacy of tropisetron was well maintained during the second consecutive chemotherapy cycle; during the first 24 hours, 72% and 62% of patients remained free of vomiting and nausea, respectively. Tropisetron appears to be a highly effective, well tolerated, and simple to use antiemetic agent for patients receiving chemotherapy.
Seminars in Oncology 10/1994; 21(5 Suppl 9):3-6. · 3.50 Impact Factor
-
Wiadomości lekarskie (Warsaw, Poland: 1960) 06/1985; 38(10):715-8.
-
Wiadomości lekarskie (Warsaw, Poland: 1960) 02/1983; 36(2):95-9.
-
Wiadomości lekarskie (Warsaw, Poland: 1960) 06/1980; 33(10):825-9.
-
Polski tygodnik lekarski (Warsaw, Poland: 1960) 07/1979; 34(23):921-2.
-
Polski tygodnik lekarski (Warsaw, Poland: 1960) 06/1978; 33(21):849-52.
-
Neurologia i neurochirurgia polska 17(5):575-7. · 0.43 Impact Factor
-
Nowotwory 38(3):174-9.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The results of combined treatment (induction chemotherapy followed by irradiation) in 23 patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx were presented. Chemotherapy program included Cisplatin 100 mg/m2 i.v. in day 1 and 5-fluorouracil 750 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1-5. The chemotherapy was administered every 3 weeks for maximum 3 cycles. Complete response in 15 patients (65%), stabilization in 4 patients (17%) and progressive disease was found in 3 patients (14%). 20 patients were irradiated with radical intention. Complete response was found in 9 patients (45%) after radiotherapy. Treatment was relatively well-tolerated. Out of 17 patients with at least 6 months' follow-up (range 6-24) 6 patients are alive with no evidence of disease. We estimate the postirradiation reaction as slightly more severe than after radiotherapy alone. The reaction did not influence the prescribed way of fractionation.
Nowotwory 40(2):125-30.
