A. Y. Chang

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic (stage IV) non-small-cell lung cancer usually have a poor prognosis and disease refractory to chemotherapy. Three new agents--taxol, merbarone, and piroxantrone--have shown promising antitumor treatment in vitro and in animals. Taxol is an antimicrotubular agent that interferes with mitosis during cell division. Merbarone, a conjugate of thiobarbituric acid and aniline, is a topoisomerase II inhibitor, which thus inhibits DNA synthesis and tumor growth. Piroxantrone, an anthracenedione derivative, is a DNA intercalating agent that has shown potent antitumor activity in animal studies. PURPOSE: Our randomized phase II study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of these agents in the treatment of stage IV metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: Eligible patients (119) were randomly assigned to receive one of the three treatments given every 3 weeks: 250 mg/m2 taxol by a 24-hour intravenous infusion, 1000 mg/m2 merbarone by continuous intravenous infusion through a central catheter daily for 5 days, or 150 mg/m2 piroxantrone by intravenous infusion over 1 hour. Patients had received no chemotherapy. Response and toxicity were evaluated every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were randomly assigned to receive taxol, 47 to receive merbarone, and 47 to receive piroxantrone. One of 44 assessable patients (2.3%) treated with piroxantrone had a complete response. Rates for partial response were 20.8% (five of 24 patients) and 5.7% (two of 35) for assessable patients treated with taxol or merbarone, respectively. One-year survival rates were 41.7%, 21.6%, and 22.6%, and median survival times were 24.1, 19.9, and 29.3 weeks for taxol, merbarone, and piroxantrone, respectively. These differences were not statistically significant, but this study was not designed to compare survival. In general, toxicity was manageable. With premedication, no anaphylaxis was observed with taxol. The most common toxic effects were leukopenia with taxol or piroxantrone treatment and thromboembolic complications with merbarone. Death directly related to treatment occurred in 4% (one patient), 11.4% (four), and 5% (two) of the assessable patients receiving taxol, merbarone, and piroxantrone, respectively. Cardiotoxicity and neurotoxicity occurred only occasionally in all three arms. CONCLUSION: On the basis of the response rate (20.8% partial response) and 1-year survival rate (41.7%), taxol is an active agent for the treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. Merbarone and piroxantrone are relatively inactive. IMPLICATIONS: Further study of taxol is warranted. In future studies, taxol should be combined with other agents, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor should be used to ameliorate myelosuppression.

Thrombocytopenia is a complication of cancer treatment that can limit dose intensity. Interleukin-11 (IL-11) is a growth factor that increases platelet production. We conducted a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of recombinant human IL-11 (rhIL-11) in 93 patients with cancer who had already been transfused platelets for severe thrombocytopenia resulting from chemotherapy. The patients had received platelet transfusions for nadir platelet counts of < or = 20,000/microL during the chemotherapy cycle immediately preceding study entry. Chemotherapy was continued during the study without dose reduction. Patients were randomized to receive placebo or rhIL-11 at 50 or 25 micrograms/kg subcutaneously once daily for 14 to 21 days beginning 1 day after chemotherapy. Eight of 27 (30%) evaluable patients treated with rhIL-11 at a dose of 50 micrograms/kg did not require platelet transfusions versus 1 of 27 (4%) patients who received placebo (P < .05). Five of 23 (18%) patients treated with rhIL-11 at 25 micrograms/kg avoided platelet transfusions (P = .23). Side effects were fatigue and cardiovascular symptoms, including a low incidence of atrial arrhythmias and syncope. There were no differences among treatment groups in the incidence of neutropenic fever, days of hospitalization, or number of red blood cell transfusions. This study shows that rhIL-11 treatment of a dose of 50 micrograms/kg significantly increases the likelihood that patients who have already been transfused platelets for severe chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia will not require platelet transfusions during a subsequent chemotherapy cycle.

PURPOSE: To determine whether the administration of carboplatin concurrently with radiation treatment improves survival in patients with inoperable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred eighty-three patients with inoperable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer were entered onto a randomized trial by the Cancer and Leukemia Group B and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Randomization was performed before initiation of any therapy. All patients received an induction chemotherapy program with vinblastine and cisplatin for 5 weeks, followed by 6,000 cGy of radiation therapy over 6 weeks. One hundred thirty-seven patients were randomized to this therapy regimen alone; 146 patients were randomized to receive carboplatin at 100 mg/m2/wk concurrent with the radiation therapy. RESULTS: The complete response was 18% with concurrent carboplatin versus 10% with radiotherapy alone (P = .101). There was no difference with respect to failure-free survival (10% with carboplatin and 9% with radiotherapy alone) or overall survival (13% with carboplatin and 10% with radiotherapy alone) at 4 years. In patients not receiving carboplatin, the relapse rate was 69% within the field of radiation and 53% in the boost volume. In patients receiving carboplatin, the relapse rate was 59% within the field of radiation and 43% in the boost volume. Patients with cancers more than 70 cm2 in size had significantly poorer survival (P = .01). CONCLUSION: Carboplatin at the dose and schedule used did not significantly impact on disease control or survival. The relapse rate within the chest remained more than 50%. More effective regimens will be required to impact on local disease control and survival.

PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of oral ondansetron in the control of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis in patients who do not require rescue antiemetic therapy for acute emesis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hundred thirty-eight chemotherapy-naive patients who received cisplatin chemotherapy (> or = 70 mg/m2), and who were not rescued for acute emesis, were eligible to be randomized to receive one of the three oral regimens to control delayed emesis. Group I received placebo on days 2 to 6; group II received ondansetron 8 mg twice daily on days 2 and 3 and placebo on days 4 to 6; group III received ondansetron 8 mg twice daily on days 2 to 6. All patients received intravenous ondansetron (0.15 mg/kg every 4 hours for three doses) for the control of acute emesis on day 1. The number of emetic episodes on days 2 and 3 combined (days 2/3, when incidence and severity of delayed emesis were expected to be greatest) was considered the primary measure of efficacy. RESULTS: Patients who received odansetron had significantly fewer emetic episodes on days 2/3, 4, and 5 than those who received placebo (P < or = .002 on each day). Additionally, significantly more patients who received ondansetron had a complete plus major response (C+MR; < or = two two emetic episodes) than those who received placebo on days 2/3 (56% v 37%, P = .001), 4 (94% v 85%, P = .005), and 5 (98% v 88%, P = .006). Patients who received ondansetron had significantly less nausea on day 2/3 when day-1 nausea was used as the baseline score (P = .025). Patients who received ondansetron also had significantly less nausea on day 4 (P = .042) and the results approached significance on day 5 (P = .066). CONCLUSION: Oral ondansetron had a significant effect in the control of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis and nausea in patients who had not required rescue antiemetics during the acute emesis period. The control of delayed nausea and vomiting was most notable in the immediate 2 days following cisplatin administration, with the clinical difference narrowing between the two treatment arms on subsequent days.

PURPOSE: This pilot study was undertaken to determine the efficacy and feasibility of alternating cisplatin and etoposide with multiple daily fractions of thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) in patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-four SCLC patients received four courses of cisplatin (30 mg/m2/d x 3) plus etoposide (120 mg/m2/d x 3) (PE) every 3 weeks. TRT was administered twice daily (1.5 Gy per fraction) for 5 consecutive days in the week after cycles 1, 2, and 3 of chemotherapy (total TRT dose, 45 Gy). Patients who achieved a complete response (CR) received one course of late-intensification (LI) treatment consisting of cyclophosphamide (4 g/m2) and etoposide (900 mg/m2). Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) was optional. RESULTS: Nineteen of 32 assessable patients achieved a CR (59%) and 12 had a partial response (38%), for an overall response rate of 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84% to 99%). Median survival was 18 months, while 2-year progression-free survival was 47%. Leukopenia < or = 1,000/microL occurred in 12% of induction treatment cycles. Severe esophagitis was uncommon. Pulmonary fibrosis that was asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic was observed in eight patients (25%). There was one episode of adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) during LI chemotherapy. Life-threatening neutropenia (< or = 500/microL) developed in all patients who underwent LI chemotherapy, with a median duration of 10 days (range, 8 to 19). Two patients died of sepsis during LI chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Alternating PE and TRT as performed in this trial is an effective brief induction regimen for limited-stage SCLC. However, this particular regimen did not appear to be substantially different in terms of efficacy or toxicity compared with regimens using concurrent chemotherapy and standard-fraction TRT. LI chemotherapy was associated with unacceptable toxicity and did not appear to have a favorable impact on survival.