Literature DB >> 16110137

Phase I trial of infusional cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide plus granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Joseph A Sparano1, Abdissa Negassa, Erick Lansigan, Robin Locke, Chamath R De Silva, Peter H Wiernik.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the recommended phase II dose (RPTD) of a 96-h continuous intravenous infusion (CIVI) of cyclophosphamide (200, 300, or 400 mg/m2/d) and etoposide (60 or 90 mg/m2/d) when used in conjunction with doxorubicin (12.5 mg/m2/d) (CDE) given every 28 d plus granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in patients with poor prognosis non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (Group A), and the same regimen given every 21 d (Group B).
METHODS: In Group A, infusional CDE was repeated every 28 d, GM-CSF (250 microg/m2) was given subcutaneously from d 6 until neutrophil recovery, with dose escalation in cohorts of three to six evaluable patients. The RPTD of cyclophosphamide and etoposide established in Group A was then used with CDE given every 3 wk (Group B) with GM-CSF given on d 6-20, and dose escalation was attempted again.
RESULTS: In Group A, the RPTD of cyclophosphamide and etoposide were 300 mg/m2/d and 90 mg/m2/d, respectively; prolonged neutropenia was the dose-limiting toxicity. In Group B, use of GM-CSF on d 6-20 did not facilitate dose escalation above the RPTD established in Group A. Complete response occurred in 13/26 patients (50%) with no prior chemotherapy, and in 4/16 patients (25%) who had relapsed after prior chemotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Because of the increase in dose and dose-density afforded by the administration of GM-CSF, the relative dose intensity was increased by twofold for cyclophosphamide (400 vs 200 mg/m2/wk) and etoposide (120 vs 60 mg/m2/wk), and by 1.3-fold for doxorubicin (16.7 vs 12.5 mg/m2/wk).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16110137     DOI: 10.1385/MO:22:3:257

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Oncol        ISSN: 1357-0560            Impact factor:   3.064


  46 in total

1.  Cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone versus intensive chemotherapy in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Authors:  R I Fisher
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 3.333

2.  Comparison of a standard regimen (CHOP) with three intensive chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Authors:  R I Fisher; E R Gaynor; S Dahlberg; M M Oken; T M Grogan; E M Mize; J H Glick; C A Coltman; T P Miller
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1993-04-08       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Use of hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors: comparison of the 1994 and 1997 American Society of Clinical Oncology surveys regarding ASCO clinical practice guidelines. Health Services Research Committee of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Authors:  C L Bennett; J A Weeks; M R Somerfield; J Feinglass; T J Smith
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor treatment before doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy priming in women with early-stage breast cancer.

Authors:  N L Kobrinsky; D E Sjolander; M S Cheang; R Levitt; P D Steen
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Abrogating chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression by recombinant granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor in patients with sarcoma: protection at the progenitor cell level.

Authors:  S Vadhan-Raj; H E Broxmeyer; W N Hittelman; N E Papadopoulos; S P Chawla; C Fenoglio; S Cooper; E S Buescher; R W Frenck; A Holian
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  IDEC-C2B8: results of a phase I multiple-dose trial in patients with relapsed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Authors:  D G Maloney; A J Grillo-López; D J Bodkin; C A White; T M Liles; I Royston; C Varns; J Rosenberg; R Levy
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Phase II trial of infusional cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide in patients with HIV-associated non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial (E1494).

Authors:  Joseph A Sparano; Sandra Lee; Michael G Chen; Tipu Nazeer; Avi Einzig; Richard F Ambinder; David H Henry; Jane Manalo; Tianhong Li; Jamie H Von Roenn
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-04-15       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Prognostic significance of received relative dose intensity in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients: application to LNH-87 protocol. The GELA. (Groupe d'Etude des Lymphomes de l'Adulte).

Authors:  E Lepage; C Gisselbrecht; C Haioun; C Sebban; H Tilly; A Bosly; P Morel; R Herbrecht; F Reyes; B Coiffier
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 32.976

9.  A predictive model for aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Authors: 
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1993-09-30       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Two-weekly or 3-weekly CHOP chemotherapy with or without etoposide for the treatment of elderly patients with aggressive lymphomas: results of the NHL-B2 trial of the DSHNHL.

Authors:  Michael Pfreundschuh; Lorenz Trümper; Marita Kloess; Rudolf Schmits; Alfred C Feller; Christian Rübe; Christian Rudolph; Marcel Reiser; Dieter K Hossfeld; Hartmut Eimermacher; Dirk Hasenclever; Norbert Schmitz; Markus Loeffler
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2004-03-11       Impact factor: 22.113

View more
  2 in total

1.  Rituximab and CHOP chemotherapy plus GM-CSF for previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the elderly: a Wisconsin oncology network study.

Authors:  Julie E Chang; Songwong Seo; Kyungmann M Kim; Jae E Werndli; Wayne A Bottner; Gilberto A Rodrigues; Federico A Sanchez; Thomas J Saphner; Walter L Longo; Brad S Kahl
Journal:  Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk       Date:  2010-10

Review 2.  Treatment of Burkitt lymphoma in children and adults: Lessons from Africa.

Authors:  Ian T Magrath
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.952

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.