INTRODUCTION: This Phase I trial aimed to determine the maximum-tolerated-dose of erlotinib administered with two standard chemoradiotherapy regimens for non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS: Unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer patients were enrolled in this 2-arm dose-escalation study. Erlotinib, given only during chemoradiotherapy, was escalated from 50 to 150 mg/d in 3 to 6 patient cohorts. Arm A: erlotinib with cisplatin (50 mg/m IV days 1, 8, 29, 36), etoposide (50 mg/m IV days 1-5, 29-33) and chest radiotherapy (66 Gy, 2 Gy/d) followed by docetaxel (75 mg/m IV Q21 d) for 3 cycles. Arm B: induction carboplatin (AUC 6) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m) for two 21-d cycles then radiotherapy with erlotinib, carboplatin (AUC = 2/wk) and paclitaxel (50 mg/m/wk). RESULTS: Seventeen patients were treated in each arm. PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS: performance status 0 to 24 patients, 1 to 10 patients, median age 63 years, adenocarcinoma 21% and female 14 patients. Dose-escalation of erlotinib to 150 mg/d was possible on both chemoradiotherapy regimens. Grade 3/4 leukopenia and neutropenia were predominant toxicities in both arms. Grade 3 chemoradiotherapy toxicities in arm A were esophagitis (3 patients), vomiting (1), ototoxicity (1), diarrhea (2), dehydration (3), pneumonitis (1); and arm B was esophagitis (6). Seven patients (21%) developed rash (all grade 1/2). Median survival times for patients on Arm A and B were 10.2 and 13.7 months, respectively. Three-year overall survival in patients with and without rash were 53% and 10%, respectively (log-rank P = 0.0807). Epidermal growth factor receptor IHC or FISH positive patients showed no significant overall survival difference. CONCLUSION: Addition of standard-dose erlotinib to chemoradiotherapy is feasible without evident increase in toxicities. However, the survival data are disappointing in this unselected patient population and does not support further investigation of this approach.
INTRODUCTION: This Phase I trial aimed to determine the maximum-tolerated-dose of erlotinib administered with two standard chemoradiotherapy regimens for non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS: Unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancerpatients were enrolled in this 2-arm dose-escalation study. Erlotinib, given only during chemoradiotherapy, was escalated from 50 to 150 mg/d in 3 to 6 patient cohorts. Arm A: erlotinib with cisplatin (50 mg/m IV days 1, 8, 29, 36), etoposide (50 mg/m IV days 1-5, 29-33) and chest radiotherapy (66 Gy, 2 Gy/d) followed by docetaxel (75 mg/m IV Q21 d) for 3 cycles. Arm B: induction carboplatin (AUC 6) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m) for two 21-d cycles then radiotherapy with erlotinib, carboplatin (AUC = 2/wk) and paclitaxel (50 mg/m/wk). RESULTS: Seventeen patients were treated in each arm. PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS: performance status 0 to 24 patients, 1 to 10 patients, median age 63 years, adenocarcinoma 21% and female 14 patients. Dose-escalation of erlotinib to 150 mg/d was possible on both chemoradiotherapy regimens. Grade 3/4 leukopenia and neutropenia were predominant toxicities in both arms. Grade 3 chemoradiotherapy toxicities in arm A were esophagitis (3 patients), vomiting (1), ototoxicity (1), diarrhea (2), dehydration (3), pneumonitis (1); and arm B was esophagitis (6). Seven patients (21%) developed rash (all grade 1/2). Median survival times for patients on Arm A and B were 10.2 and 13.7 months, respectively. Three-year overall survival in patients with and without rash were 53% and 10%, respectively (log-rank P = 0.0807). Epidermal growth factor receptor IHC or FISH positive patients showed no significant overall survival difference. CONCLUSION: Addition of standard-dose erlotinib to chemoradiotherapy is feasible without evident increase in toxicities. However, the survival data are disappointing in this unselected patient population and does not support further investigation of this approach.
Authors: Roy S Herbst; Diane Prager; Robert Hermann; Lou Fehrenbacher; Bruce E Johnson; Alan Sandler; Mark G Kris; Hai T Tran; Pam Klein; Xin Li; David Ramies; David H Johnson; Vincent A Miller Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-07-25 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: R K Schmidt-Ullrich; R B Mikkelsen; P Dent; D G Todd; K Valerie; B D Kavanagh; J N Contessa; W K Rorrer; P B Chen Journal: Oncogene Date: 1997-09-04 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Prakash Chinnaiyan; Shyhmin Huang; Geetha Vallabhaneni; Eric Armstrong; Sooryanarayana Varambally; Scott A Tomlins; Arul M Chinnaiyan; Paul M Harari Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2005-04-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Everett E Vokes; James E Herndon; Michael J Kelley; M Giulia Cicchetti; Nithya Ramnath; Harvey Neill; James N Atkins; Dorothy M Watson; Wallace Akerley; Mark R Green Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-04-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: K Furuse; M Fukuoka; M Kawahara; H Nishikawa; Y Takada; S Kudoh; N Katagami; Y Ariyoshi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Giuseppe Giaccone; Roy S Herbst; Christian Manegold; Giorgio Scagliotti; Rafael Rosell; Vincent Miller; Ronald B Natale; Joan H Schiller; Joachim Von Pawel; Anna Pluzanska; Ulrich Gatzemeier; John Grous; Judith S Ochs; Steven D Averbuch; Michael K Wolf; Pamela Rennie; Abderrahim Fandi; David H Johnson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Denis Soulieres; Neil N Senzer; Everett E Vokes; Manuel Hidalgo; Sanjiv S Agarwala; Lillian L Siu Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-01-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Christopher M Mahaffey; Angela M Davies; Primo N Lara; Brandi Pryde; William Holland; Philip C Mack; Paul H Gumerlock; David R Gandara Journal: Clin Lung Cancer Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 4.785