» Articles » PMID: 9220295

A Phase II Trial of Intravenous Vinorelbine in Previously Untreated Patients with Extensive Small Cell Lung Cancer, a Southwest Oncology Group Study

Overview
Publisher Springer
Specialty Oncology
Date 1997 Jan 1
PMID 9220295
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Twenty-two eligible patients with previously untreated extensive small cell lung cancer received intravenous vinorelbine 30 mg/M2 each week until progression. Response was assessed every 4 weeks by chest x-ray or every 8 weeks by CT scan. All responses had to be "confirmed" at all involved sites at least 4 weeks later. Fourteen patients were male and 8 were female with a median age of 64.5 years (range 38-76). Fifteen patients were Caucasian and 7 were African-American. One patient had a "confirmed" partial response, 3 had unconfirmed responses, 13 had stable or progressive disease, and 5 did not have adequate data. The median progression-free survival was 3 months with a median overall survival of 8 months. Thirteen patients experienced 22 episodes of grade 3 toxicity, more than half due to leukopenia and neutropenia, and 1 due to paresthesias. Of 4 episodes of grade 4 toxicity, 1 was due to leukopenia and 3 were due to hyponatremia which was not due to vinorelbine. Significant thrombocytopenia did not occur. The activity of single agent vinorelbine in untreated small cell lung cancer was disappointing when analyzed by Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) criteria. The median survival in this trial was similar to that found in other SWOG trials using cisplatin based front line therapy and thus confirms previously reported findings that initial treatment with a phase II agent followed by a cisplatin based regimen at progression does not adversely affect overall survival in this population of patients.

Citing Articles

Chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer: a comprehensive review.

Karim S, Zekri J Oncol Rev. 2015; 6(1):e4.

PMID: 25992206 PMC: 4419639. DOI: 10.4081/oncol.2012.e4.


Extensive disease small cell lung cancer dose-response relationships: implications for resistance mechanisms.

Stewart D, Johnson C, Lopez A, Glisson B, Rhee J, Bekele B J Thorac Oncol. 2010; 5(11):1826-34.

PMID: 20881640 PMC: 2966343. DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181f387c7.

References
1.
Fellous A, Ohayon R, Vacassin T, Binet S, Lataste H, KRIKORIAN A . Biochemical effects of Navelbine on tubulin and associated proteins. Semin Oncol. 1989; 16(2 Suppl 4):9-14. View

2.
Evans W, Eisenhauer E, Cormier Y, Ayoub J, Wierzbicki R, Laberge F . Phase II study of amonafide: results of treatment and lessons learned from the study of an investigational agent in previously untreated patients with extensive small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1990; 8(3):390-5. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1990.8.3.390. View

3.
Binet S, Fellous A, Lataste H, KRIKORIAN A, Couzinier J, Meininger V . In situ analysis of the action of Navelbine on various types of microtubules using immunofluorescence. Semin Oncol. 1989; 16(2 Suppl 4):5-8. View

4.
Ettinger D, Finkelstein D, Abeloff M, Skeel R, Stott P, Frontiera M . Justification for evaluating new anticancer drugs in selected untreated patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group randomized study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1992; 84(14):1077-84. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/84.14.1077. View

5.
Green S, Dahlberg S . Planned versus attained design in phase II clinical trials. Stat Med. 1992; 11(7):853-62. DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780110703. View