SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “cisplatin”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2003

Gemcitabine and cisplatin versus vinorelbine and cisplatin versus ifosfamide+gemcitabine followed by vinorelbine and cisplatin versus vinorelbine and cisplatin followed by ifosfamide and gemcitabine in stage IIIB-IV non small cell lung carcinoma: a prospective randomized phase III trial of the Gruppo Oncologico Italia Meridionale.

PURPOSE: we carried out a phase III randomized trial to compare vinorelbine-cisplatin regimen to gemcitabine-cisplatin regimen, and to a sequential administration of gemcitabine-ifosfamide followed by vinorelbine-cisplatin or the opposite sequence of vinorelbine-cisplatin followed by ifosfamide-gemcitabine according to the 'worst drug rule' hypothesis in patients with locally advanced unresectable stage IIIB or metastatic stage IV non-small cell lung cancer. The primary endpoint was survival parameters, while secondary endpoints included analysis of response rates and toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: patients were randomized to receive: (a) gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15 plus ifosfamide 1500 mg/m(2) on days 8-12 with mesna uroprotection (GI regimen) followed by vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 plus cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 (GI --> VC regimen); (b) the opposite sequence (VC --> GI); (c) vinorelbine plus cisplatin as above described (VC regimen); or (d) gemcitabine 1400 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 plus cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 8 (GC regimen). All regimens were given every 4 weeks. All patients were chemotherapy naive and had a ECOG PS 0-2. RESULTS: 400 patients were enrolled into the trial. Interim analysis after inclusion of 243 patients showed that ORR were 19% in the GI --> VC arm, 32% in the inverse sequence arm (CV --> GI), 42% in the VC arm, and 30% in the GC arm. The VC arm was statistically superior over the GI --> VC arm (p = 0.0074), but not over the other regimens. Median TTP was 3.1 months in the GI --> VC arm versus 5.0 months in the VC --> GI arm (p = 0.014). For these reasons the GI --> VC and VC --> GI arm were closed since the 'worst drug rule' hypothesis was rejected. Accrual in the VC and GC arms continued up to 140 and 138 patients respectively. Final ORR were 44% for the VC regimen (4 CR), and 34% for the GC regimen (1 CR). This difference was statistically significant (p = 0.032). OS was 9.0 and 8.2 months, respectively, with no statistically significant difference. The 1-year survival rate was 24 and 20%, respectively for VC and GC regimens. As expected the incidence of phlebitis was higher in the VC arm, while thrombocytopenia, flu-like syndrome and asthenia were more frequent in the GC arm. CONCLUSIONS: the results of this trial indicate that the combination of vinorelbine and cisplatin and that of gemcitabine and cisplatin are equivalent in terms of median TTP and OS, although the vinorelbine-cisplatin regimen is associated with a higher ORR. Both regimens may be considered as reference treatments for future studies. Moreover, our data reject the 'worst drug rule' hypothesis of sequential treatments in NSCCL at least with the combination used in this study.

Adenocarcinoma↗

PubMed1997

Randomized trial of cisplatin versus cisplatin plus mitolactol versus cisplatin plus ifosfamide in advanced squamous carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study.

PURPOSE: Cisplatin, mitolactol (dibromodulcitol), and ifosfamide have been the most active single agents in squamous carcinoma of the cervix identified so far by the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG). Combinations of cisplatin plus ifosfamide and cisplatin plus mitolactol are prospectively compared with cisplatin alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive cisplatin 50 mg/m2 or the same dose of cisplatin plus mitolactol (C + M) 180 mg/m2 orally on days 2 to 6, or cisplatin plus ifosfamide (CIFX) 5 g/m2 given as a 24-hour infusion plus mesna 6 g/m2 during and for 12 hours after the ifosfamide infusion, every 3 weeks for up to six courses. Of 454 patients entered, 438 were eligible and analyzed for response and survival. RESULTS: CIFX had a higher response rate (31.1% v 17.8%, p = .004) and longer progression-free survival (PFS) time (P = .003) compared with cisplatin alone. The median times to progression or death were 4.6 and 3.2 months, respectively. C + M showed no significant improvement in these parameters compared with cisplatin alone. Survival was associated with initial performance score (PS; 0 was more favorable; P < .001) and with age (younger was unfavorable, P = .025). There was no significant difference in overall survival between cisplatin and either of the combinations. Leukopenia, renal toxicity, peripheral neurotoxicity, and CNS toxicity were more frequent with CIFX (P < .05). CONCLUSION: CIFX improved the response rate and PFS duration in advanced cervix cancer compared with cisplatin alone, but at the cost of greater toxicity and with no improvement in survival.

Adult↗

PubMed1995

Combination therapy with cisplatin and nifedipine induces apoptosis in cisplatin-sensitive and cisplatin-resistant human glioblastoma cells.

We attempted to determine whether calcium channel blockers (CCBs) enhance the anti-tumour activity of cis-diamminedichloroplatinum (cisplatin) against both cisplatin-sensitive human glioblastoma U87 MG cells and cisplatin-resistant U87-MG-CR cells, the latter of which we developed for resistance to cisplatin. Nifedipine, a dihydropyridine class CCB, significantly enhanced the anti-tumour effect of cisplatin on these two cell types in vitro and in vivo. Our findings also indicated that, in the absence of normal extracellular Ca2+ nifedipine was capable of enhancing the cytotoxicity of cisplatin. In addition, this anti-tumour activity was partially inhibited by actinomycin D and cycloheximide, suggesting that it is possibly dependent upon new RNA and protein synthesis. Interestingly, ultrastructural analysis, DNA fragmentation assay and cell cycle analysis demonstrated that synergism between cisplatin and nifedipine results in apoptosis (programmed cell death) at a relatively low concentration of cisplatin, which when tested alone did not induce apoptosis. Furthermore, we demonstrated that nuclei from these cells lack a Ca(2+)-dependent endonuclease that degrade chromatin in the linker region between nucleosomes. In conclusion, our studies suggest that the non-cytotoxic agent nifedipine is able to synergistically enhance the anti-tumour effects of cisplatin on U87-MG and U87-MG-CR cells lacking a Ca(2+)-dependent endonuclease and subsequently to induce apoptosis via interaction of nifedipine with an as yet uncharacterised functional site other than a calcium channel on target cells.

Animals↗

PubMed1994

Randomized comparison of cisplatin, methotrexate, bleomycin and vincristine (CABO) versus cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (CF) versus cisplatin (C) in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. A phase III study of the EORTC Head and Neck Cancer Cooperative Group.

BACKGROUND: The EORTC Head and Neck Cancer Cooperative Group conducted a randomized comparison of cisplatin, methotrexate, bleomycin and vincristine (CABO) versus cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (CF) versus cisplatin (C) in chemotherapy naive patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. The primary objectives of this study were to investigate whether the CF regimen was in anyway superior to the CABO regimen and to detect any superiority of these two combinations over cisplatin alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred eighty-two patients were randomized to one of three treatments: (1) methotrexate (40 mg/m2) days 1 and 15, bleomycin (10 mg) and vincristine (2 mg) days 1, 8 and 15, cisplatin (50 mg/m2) day 4, repeated every 21 days, (2) cisplatin (100 mg/m2) and 5-FU (1 g/m2 x 4), repeated every 21 days, and (3) cisplatin (50 mg/m2) days 1 and 8, repeated every 28 days. After 3 cycles, all responding and stable disease patients in the three arms of the study continued with cisplatin alone. RESULTS: The overall response rates to CABO (34%) and CF (31%) were superior to C (15%) (p < 0.001, p = 0.003, respectively). In addition, complete response rate to CABO (9.5%) was superior to that of C (2.5%) (p = 0.02), and also superior to that of CF (1.7%) (p = 0.01). Response was associated with performance status and prior treatment, but by multivariate analysis treatment type was the important determinant of response (p = 0.0006). Although CABO and CF were superior to C with respect to time to progression within the first 6 to 8 months after randomization, there was no overall difference in progression-free survival or survival between the three arms of the study. Both hematologic and non-hematologic toxicity were worse in the combination chemotherapy arms. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the CF regimen has no advantage over the CABO regimen, which in fact showed a higher complete response rate. Both combinations showed improved response rates but also more toxicity and no improvement in overall survival in comparison with cisplatin alone.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Two sequential studies for primary peritoneal carcinoma: induction with weekly cisplatin followed by either cisplatin-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide or paclitaxel-cisplatin.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current study is to evaluate the results of therapy with induction with weekly cisplatin followed by the combination of cisplatin-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (PAC) or the combination paclitaxel-cisplatin (TP) as first-line chemotherapy in patients with primary peritoneal adenocarcinoma (PPA). METHODS: Between October 1988 and July 1996, 46 patients with PPA were treated with PAC (n = 25) or TP (n = 21) following cytoreductive surgery in two sequential trials. In trial 1, patients received induction with weekly cisplatin (1 mg/kg) x 4 followed by monthly cisplatin (50 mg/m2), cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m2), and doxorubicin (50 mg/m2) for 10 cycles. In trial 2, patients received induction with weekly cisplatin (1 mg/kg) x 4 followed by monthly cisplatin (75 mg/m2) and paclitaxel (135 mg/m2) over 24 hr for 6 cycles. Surgical assessment of response was performed in 15 (60.0%) and 13 (61.9%) patients in the PAC and TP trials, respectively. Estimated survival and progression-free survival distributions were calculated by the method of Kaplan and Meier. Survival curves were compared using the log rank test. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between patients in either treatment arm with respect to median age, substage, percentage of patients undergoing optimal cytoreductive surgery, median preoperative CA125 values, performance status, proportion of patients who had second-look procedures, or median cumulative doses of cisplatin. The incidence of nausea and vomiting as well as peripheral neuropathy was significantly higher among patients who received TP (P = 0.005 and 0.022, respectively). The overall response, surgical response, and complete surgical response were not statistically different among patients who received PAC and those who received TP (62.5% versus 70.0%, P = 0.75, 73.3% versus 76.9%, P = 0.1, and 13.3% versus 23.1%, P = 0.64, respectively). Patients who underwent optimal cytoreductive surgery demonstrated higher response than patients whose tumors could not be optimally cytoreduced (76.7% versus 42.9%, P = 0.04). There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival or time to progression/recurrence between the PAC and TP groups (median 21.5 versus 24.0 months, P = 0.68, and 17.3 versus 24.0 months, P = 0.59, respectively). In both treatment groups combined, 18 of 32 patients whose tumors were optimally cytoreduced and 3 of 14 patients whose tumors were suboptimally cytoreduced had surgically verified response. Patients who underwent optimal cytoreductive surgery exhibited longer survival than those who underwent suboptimal cytoreductive surgery (median 29.4 versus 18.6 months, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Both PAC and TP regimens are effective combinations in patients with PPA. The median survival was similar following PAC and TP but the responses and time to recurrence/progression were nonsignificantly better in the paclitaxel combination.

Adenocarcinoma↗

PubMed2000

Tirapazamine plus cisplatin versus cisplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A report of the international CATAPULT I study group. Cisplatin and Tirapazamine in Subjects with Advanced Previously Untreated Non-Small-Cell Lung Tumors.

PURPOSE: A phase III trial, Cisplatin and Tirapazamine in Subjects with Advanced Previously Untreated Non-Small-Cell Lung Tumors (CATAPULT I), was designed to determine the efficacy and safety of tirapazamine plus cisplatin for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated NSCLC were randomized to receive either tirapazamine (390 mg/m(2) infused over 2 hours) followed 1 hour later by cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) over 1 hour) or 75 mg/m(2) of cisplatin alone, every 3 weeks for a maximum of eight cycles. RESULTS: A total of 446 patients with NSCLC (17% with stage IIIB disease and pleural effusions; 83% with stage IV disease) were entered onto the study. Karnofsky performance status (KPS) was >/= 60 for all patients (for 10%, KPS = 60; for 90%, KPS = 70 to 100). Sixty patients (14%) had clinically stable brain metastases. The median survival was significantly longer (34.6 v 27. 7 weeks; P =.0078) and the response rate was significantly greater (27.5% v 13.7%; P <.001) for patients who received tirapazamine plus cisplatin (n = 218) than for those who received cisplatin alone (n = 219). The tirapazamine-plus-cisplatin regimen was associated with mild to moderate adverse events, including acute, reversible hearing loss, reversible, intermittent muscle cramping, diarrhea, skin rash, nausea, and vomiting. There were no incremental increases in myelosuppression, peripheral neuropathy, or renal, hepatic, or cardiac toxicity and no deaths related to tirapazamine. CONCLUSION: The CATAPULT I study shows that tirapazamine enhances the activity of cisplatin in patients with advanced NSCLC and confirms that hypoxia is an exploitable therapeutic target in human malignancies.

Adult↗

PubMed1998

Pharmacokinetics of cisplatin in combined cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil therapy: a comparative study of three different schedules of cisplatin administration.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin is widely used in combination chemotherapy against a variety of tumors; however, the optimal administration schedule of cisplatin is still controversial. To clarify the pharmacokinetic differences according to the administration schedules of cisplatin, we compared three different administration schedules of cisplatin such as single short-term infusion, daily short-term infusion and daily continuous infusion in combination with 5-fluorouracil. Preliminary clinical responses and toxicities were also investigated. METHODS: A total of 12 courses in combination of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil therapy was studied. The schedules of cisplatin tested were as follows: single short-term infusion (80 mg/m2, day 1,2 h div., n = 4), daily short-term infusion (20 mg/m2, days 1 to 5, 2 h div., n = 4), daily continuous infusion (100 mg/m2, 120 h, n = 4). In all schedules, 5-fluorouracil was continuously administered at a dose of 800 mg/m2/day on days 1 to 5. The area under the time-concentration curve (AUC) and the maximum concentration (Cmax) of total and free Pt were investigated. RESULTS: The highest AUC of total and free Pt and the lowest Cmax of free Pt were observed in the daily continuous infusion (total AUC; 162.53 +/- 18.39 micrograms h/ml, free AUC; 5.50 +/- 0.9 micrograms h/ml, free Cmax; 0.07 +/- 0.01 microgram/ml, mean +/- SEM). Two patients in the single short-term infusion and one patient in the daily continuous infusion indicated partial responses clinically. No nephrotoxicity or ototoxicity was observed. All toxicities were mild and tolerable in all regimens; however, the incidence of GI toxicity in daily continuous infusion seemed to be relatively higher. CONCLUSIONS: Daily continuous infusion of cisplatin gave the best pharmacokinetic results and to evaluate the clinical advantage of this schedule a prospective randomized trial should be conducted with sufficient numbers of patients.

Aged↗

PubMed1998

Prospective sequential trials of induction weekly cisplatin followed by monthly cisplatin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide and paclitaxel and cisplatin in optimal (< or = 1 cm) stage III and IV ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION: This study was conduced to assess the results of paclitaxel plus cisplatin given over six months as firstline therapy in women with stage III and IV epithelial ovarian cancer with residual disease < 1 cm and compare it to our previous standard of cisplatin, adriamycin, and cyclophosphamide given over ten months in two sequential trials totaling 100 patients. METHODS: We compared induction weekly cisplatin (1 mg/kg x 4) followed by monthly cisplatin (50 mg/m2), doxorubicin (50 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m2) x 10 (n = 56) versus induction cisplatin (1 mg/kg x 4) followed by cisplatin (75 mg/m2) and paclitaxel (135 mg/m2) monthly over six months (n = 44). RESULTS: The two groups were similar in age, histologic subtypes, grade, performance status, and substage. The mean dose of cisplatin in the PAC patients was 617.1 (+/-92.7) mg/m2 as compared to 567.1 (+/-89.2) mg/m2 in the TP patients (p < 0.0001). Surgical response was assessed in 83.9% of the PAC and 86.4% of the TP patients. The incidence of nausea and vomiting, myelotoxicity and renal toxicity were similar in the two groups. Peripheral neuropathy occurred more frequently following TP (57% vs 16%; p = 0.001). Cardiac toxicity (grade 1) occurred in 39% of the PAC patients and in 4.5% of the TP patients (p < 0.001). The overall response rate (75% vs 88.7%), surgical response rate (67.9% vs 79.5%), complete surgical responses (37.5% vs 40.9%), estimated two-year survival (80.2% vs 79.6%), progression-free median survival (36 months vs 30.4 months) and two-year progression/recurrence rates (32.3% vs 46.9%), respectively, of PAC and TP patients were not statistically significant (p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Given the discussed limitations of the study, compared with PAC, TP did not improve overall and surgical response rates, two-year survival, two year disease-free survival, or median time of recurrence in patients with optimal (< 1 cm) stage III and IV ovarian cancer and resulted in higher peripheral neuropathy rates.

Adult↗

PubMed1996

Roberts syndrome fibroblasts showing cisplatin hypersensitivity have normal host cell reactivation of cisplatin-treated adenovirus and normal capacity of cisplatin-treated cells for adenovirus DNA synthesis.

Roberts syndrome (RS) is a rare, recessively inherited disorder characterized by growth retardation, limb reductions and craniofacial deformities. Cells from a subset of afflicted individuals, termed RS+, display unusual separation or puffing of the heterochromatic regions of their chromosomes and are hypersensitive to several DNA-damaging agents including mitomycin C (MMC) and cisplatin, both of which can induce interstrand crosslinks in DNA. For this reason, we have investigated the ability of RS+ fibroblasts to repair cisplatin-induced DNA lesions using adenoviris as a probe. Host cell reactivation of cisplatin-treated adenovirus (Ad) was significantly reduced in nucleotide excision repair (NER)-deficient xeroderma pigmentosum (XP) cells but was normal in the two RS+ fibroblast strains and the Fanconi's anemia (FA)fibroblast strain tested. The capacity of cisplatin-treated cells for Ad DNA synthesis was reduced in XP and FA cells compared to normal human cells, but was not reduced in RS+ cells. These results indicate that the hypersensitivity of RS+ cells to cisplatin is not due to a deficiency in NER nor due to a deficiency in the pathway which leads to cisplatin hypersensitivity in FA cells. It is possible that the abnormal heterochromatin organisation of RS+ cells selectively renders the heterochromatic regions of the genome more susceptible to mutagen damage and/or less available for repair.

Adenoviruses, Human↗

PubMed2000

Randomized trial comparing cisplatin, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine with either cisplatin and gemcitabine or cisplatin and vinorelbine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: interim analysis of a phase III trial of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group.

PURPOSE: In our previous phase II study, the cisplatin, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine (PGV) regimen produced a median survival time (MST) of approximately 1 year in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The present study was aimed at comparing the MST of patients treated with this triplet regimen with the MSTs of patients receiving cisplatin and vinorelbine (PV) or cisplatin and gemcitabine (PG). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From April 1997, patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, an age of < or = 70 years, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status < or = 1 were randomized to receive one of the following regimens: cisplatin 50 mg/m(2), gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2), and vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks (arm A); cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks (arm B); or cisplatin 120 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 29 and vinorelbine 30 mg/m(2)/wk (arm C). According to the two-stage design for phase III trials, an interim analysis was planned when the first 60 patients per arm were assessable for survival. RESULTS: The survival data of 180 NSCLC patients (stage IIIB, 76 patients; stage IV, 104 patients) were analyzed in April 1999. Overall, 128 patients had died (PGV, n = 33; PG, n = 42; and PV, n = 53). The MST of patients in the PGV, PG, and PV arms was 51, 42, and 35 weeks, respectively, and the corresponding 1-year projected survival rates were 45%, 40%, and 34%, respectively. When only patients with stage IV disease were considered, an even stronger difference was seen between PGV (MST = 47 weeks) and both PG (34 weeks) and PV (27 weeks). At multivariate Cox analysis, the estimate hazard of death for patients receiving PGV compared with those receiving PV was 0.35 (95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.77; P <.01). The response rates were 47% in the PGV arm, 30% in the PG arm, 25% in the PV arm. Both hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities were not substantially worse in patients who received the PGV regimen. CONCLUSION: The PGV regimen is associated with a substantial survival gain (MST > 3 months longer) when compared with the PV combination. Because this difference in survival met one of the early stopping rules, the accrual in the PV arm has been stopped (null hypothesis rejected). Enrollment still continues in the PGV and PG arm to ascertain whether the PGV regimen can also produce a significantly longer survival than that obtained with the PG regimen.

Adult↗

PubMed1993

Effect of modulation of protein kinase C activity on cisplatin cytotoxicity in cisplatin-resistant and cisplatin-sensitive human osteosarcoma cells.

The effect of modulation of protein kinase C (PKC) activity by 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate (TPA) on cisplatin cytotoxicity was examined in a human osteosarcoma U2-OS cell line and in a U2-OS variant (U2-OS/Pt) selected after continuous exposure to increasing concentrations of cisplatin. U2-OS/Pt cells showed a 7.5-fold resistance to the drug. A 24 h exposure of cells to TPA caused a potentiation of cisplatin cytotoxicity in sensitive and in resistant cells; under these conditions, PKC activity was shown to be down-regulated. In contrast, a short-term exposure of cells to TPA did not affect cisplatin cytotoxicity in U2-OS or in U2-OS/Pt cells. These results support the involvement of PKC in cellular response to cisplatin. However, this enzyme is probably not directly implicated in the mechanisms of acquired resistance in this cell system.

Cisplatin↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Cisplatin versus cisplatin plus D-Trp-6-LHRH in the treatment of ovarian cancer: a pilot trial to investigate the effect of the addition of a GnRH analogue to cisplatin.

Thirty-four patients with histologically confirmed ovarian cancer were entered into a pilot study. Patients were randomized to receive cisplatin alone or cisplatin plus D-Trp-6-LHRH(decapeptyl). Objective response (complete and partial response) was documented in 9 of 14 patients on cisplatin and in 12 of 18 patients on cisplatin plus decapeptyl. Median time to treatment failure and median survival times were the same in the two treatment regimens. Toxicities were similar in the two treatment arms, except for hot flashes which only occurred in patients on cisplatin plus decapeptyl.

Antineoplastic Agents↗

PubMed2000

Interim analysis of a phase III trial comparing cisplatin, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine vs. either cisplatin and gemcitabine or cisplatin and vinorelbine in advanced non small-cell lung cancer. A Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Group Study.

In a previous phase II randomized study, a cisplatin/gemcitabine/vinorelbine (PGV) regimen produced a 50-week median survival time (MST) in advanced non small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The present trial was planned to randomly compare the outcome of patients treated with this new triplet regimen with those of patients receiving either cisplatin plus vinorelbine (PV) or cisplatin plus gemcitabine (PG) doublet combinations. One hundred eighty patients with stage IIIB (76) or IV (104) disease, aged <or= 70 years, and with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) <or= 1, were randomly allocated to receive: cisplatin, 50 mg/m2 plus gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2 plus vinorelbine, 25 mg/m2 (PGV) on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks; cisplatin, 100 mg/m2 on day 1 plus gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2 (PG) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks; cisplatin, 120 mg/m2 on days 1 and 29 plus vinorelbine, 30 mg/m2/week (PV). At the planned interim analysis, the MST of patients in the PGV, PG, and PV arms was 51, 42, and 35 weeks, respectively. The hazard of death (Cox analysis) for patients receiving PGV compared with those receiving PV was 0.35 (95% confidence index [CI], 0.16-0.77, P = 0.0058). The response rate was 47% in the PGV arm, 30% in the PG arm, and 25% in the PV arm. Severe neutropenia (75% vs. 45%), and vomiting (50% vs. 15%) significantly affected more patients in the PV than in the PGV arm. Since the difference in survival met early stopping rules, accrual to the PV arm was suspended. Enrollment still continues in the PGV and PG arms to ascertain whether the triplet regimen has a more significant effect on survival than that produced with the PG regimen.

Clinical Trial↗

PubMed2006

Randomized phase III study of cisplatin plus irinotecan versus carboplatin plus paclitaxel, cisplatin plus gemcitabine, and cisplatin plus vinorelbine for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: Four-Arm Cooperative Study in Japan.

BACKGROUND: To compare the efficacy and toxicity of three platinum-based combination regimens against cisplatin plus irinotecan (IP) in patients with untreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) by a non-inferiority design. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 602 patients were randomly assigned to one of four regimens: cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus irinotecan 60 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15 every 4 weeks (IP) carboplatin AUC 6.0 min x mg/mL (area under the concentration-time curve) on day 1 plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 3 weeks (TC); cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 every 3 weeks (GP); and cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 every 3 weeks (NP). RESULTS: The response rate, median survival time, and 1-year survival rate were 31.0%, 13.9 months, 59.2%, respectively, in IP; 32.4%, 12.3 months, 51.0% in TC; 30.1%, 14.0 months, 59.6% in GP; and 33.1%, 11.4 months, 48.3% in NP. No statistically significant differences were found in response rate or overall survival, but the non-inferiority of none of the experimental regimens could be confirmed. All the four regimens were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: The four regimens have similar efficacy and different toxicity profiles, and they can be used to treat advanced NSCLC patients.

Adenocarcinoma↗

PubMed1992

Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing cisplatin with cisplatin and cyclophosphamide with cisplatin, cyclophosphamide, and adriamycin in advanced ovarian cancer. GICOG (Gruppo Interregionale Cooperativo Oncologico Ginecologia), Italy.

We report the long-term results of a randomized trial comparing cisplatin (P) with cisplatin and cyclophosphamide (CP) with cisplatin, cyclophosphamide, and adriamycin (CAP) in advanced ovarian cancer. Overall, this update confirms previously published data on 529 cases. Median survival times for the three treatments--CAP, CP, and P--are, respectively, 23, 20, and 19 months. The differences among the three arms are still nonsignificant and the estimated percentage survival at 7 years and confidence limits are, respectively, 21.7 (14.9-28.4), 17.0 (11.0-22.9), and 12.2 (6.9-17.4). According to the results of the Cox regression model on prognostic factors, higher grading, a larger residual tumor size, and performance status less than 80 (Karnovsky) all were independently associated with a poorer outcome, while a serous histotype was related to a better prognosis. The other variables (age, stage, center, type of surgery) initially included in the model did not appear to be significantly related to prognosis. The implications of these long-terms results relative to the application of combination chemotherapy with CAP or CP are discussed.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗

PubMed1991

A randomized trial in inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer: vindesine and cisplatin versus mitomycin, vindesine, and cisplatin versus etoposide and cisplatin alternating with vindesine and mitomycin.

Patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomly assigned to receive one of three dosage regimens: (1) vindesine and cisplatin (VP); (2) mitomycin, vindesine, and cisplatin (MVP); or (3) etoposide and cisplatin alternating with vindesine and mitomycin (EP/VM). In 199 assessable patients, the response rates were VP, 33%; MVP, 43%; and EP/VM, 19%. The addition of mitomycin to the VP regimen did not significantly improve the response rate. The response rate was significantly lower with the EP/VM regimen than with the MVP regimen (P less than .01). The median survival times were VP, 50 weeks; MVP, 42 weeks; and EP/VM, 40 weeks. These differences were not significant. Grade III or IV thrombocytopenia was significantly greater (P less than .01) in MVP patients (22%) than in the VP (5%). Other toxicities were similar in the three groups. Analyses of prognostic factors showed that treatment with MVP, sex, and histologic classification (squamous cell carcinoma) were predictive of improved response. Important factors for improved survival, according to the Cox regression analysis, were the stage of disease, performance status, sex, weight loss before diagnosis, and hemoglobin concentration.

Adult↗

PubMed1996

A phase III randomized trial of cisplatin plus vindesine versus cisplatin plus vindesine plus mitomycin C versus cisplatin plus vindesine plus ifosfamide for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

A randomized trial of chemotherapy in 105 patients with advanced and metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NCSLC) was conducted in order to compare the effect of the additional drug mitomycin C (PVM) or ifosfamide (PVI), to the combination of cisplatin plus vindesine (PV). An objective response rate was observed in 42.8% of the patients treated with PVM, 42.4% with PVI and 28.6% with PV and these response rates were not statistically significant (P > 0.20). No patient achieved the complete response with either of the three regimens. Comparison of the median response durations among the three regimens showed an advantage of PVI over PVM (P < 0.02) and PV (P < 0.05). The median survival times (MST) were similar for all three regimens (PVM, 33.5; PVI, 40.0 and PV, 36.5 weeks); moreover, the difference in survival time between the three regimens of responders was not statistically significant. The univariate analysis showed that significant predictors of survival were performance status (PS) zero (P = 0.0002), limited disease (P = 0.004), no previous weight loss (P = 0.01) and normal serum albumin (P = 0.016), and in multivariate analysis by a stepwise Cox proportional hazard model, these were PS zero (a hazard ratio of 2.3, P = 0.0001) and limited disease (a hazard ratio of 1.9, P = 0.048). Toxicity did not differ among the three treatment regimens.

Aged↗

PubMed1984

Cisplatin-MECY (methotrexate-leucovorin rescue plus cyclophosphamide) versus cisplatin-CHAD (cyclophosphamide, hexamethylmelamine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin) as initial chemotherapy in stage III-IV ovarian adenocarcinoma.

Thirty-three patients with advanced-stage ovarian adenocarcinomas, with no prior chemotherapy, were treated with weekly cisplatin (DDP) for four courses followed by five monthly courses of one of two randomly assigned multidrug combinations. These combinations were high-dose methotrexate-leucovorin plus cyclophosphamide (MECY) or cyclophosphamide, hexamethylmelamine, doxorubicin, and DDP (CHAD). Patients with no clinically measurable disease after 6 months of therapy were evaluated by laparoscopy. In the absence of disease progression at the time of the laparoscopy the study design called for a repeat cycle of four weekly DDP courses and another five monthly courses of the assigned multidrug combination. All patients with no evidence of disease after 1 year of treatment had a second-look laparoscopy which, if negative, was followed by a second-look laparotomy. This report includes all of the consecutively entered patients observed for a minimum of 1 year or to death. DDP-MECY and DDP-CHAD were similarly active for overall response rates and complete response rates according to laparoscopic criteria. However, DDP-MECY had a statistically significantly lower relapse rate (P less than 0.02) and a statistically significantly higher negative second-look laparotomy rate than did DDP-CHAD. Using all entered patients, with no exclusions from analysis, eight of 17 patients (47%) treated with DDP-MECY had negative second-looks after 1 year of treatment. This compares with one of 16 (6%) negative second-looks in patients treated with DDP-CHAD (P less than 0.02). The high negative second-look rate with DDP-MECY is exciting. Positive cytologic washings at the 6-month laparoscopic evaluation were highly predictive that residual disease would be found at the 1-year second-look surgery. Only one patient with positive peritoneal cytology after 6 months of treatment was found to have a negative second-look after 1 year of therapy.

Adenocarcinoma↗