Philip E Lammers1, Yu Shyr, Chung-I Li, Anne Smith Hutchison, Alan Sandler, David Paul Carbone, David H Johnson, Vicki Leigh Keedy, Leora Horn. 1. *Department of Internal Medicine, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, Tennessee; †Department of Biostatistics, Center for Quantitative Science, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee; ‡South Carolina Oncology Associates, Columbia, South Carolina; §Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Oregon Health and Science University, OHSU Knight Cancer Institute, Portland, Oregon; ‖Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital, Columbus, Ohio; ¶Department of Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; and #Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To determine the time to progression (TTP), response rate (RR), and toxicity for North American patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) treated with bendamustine in the second- or third-line setting. METHODS: Patients with relapsed, histologically confirmed SCLC were eligible for enrollment on study. The study population included patients with both chemotherapy-sensitive and chemotherapy-resistant disease treated with up to two prior lines of chemotherapy. Patients were treated with 120 mg/m of bendamustine on days 1 and 2 of a 21-day cycle for up to six cycles. Primary end point was TTP; secondary end points included toxicity, RR, and overall survival. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were accrued, 50 patients met eligibility for enrollment. The median age of patients was 62, and 56% were men. Twenty-nine patients (58%) had chemotherapy-sensitive disease. Median TTP was 4.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.3-5.4), median overall survival was 4.8 months (95% CI, 3.8-6.3), and the RR was 26% (95% CI, 13.3%-39.5%). Patients with chemosensitive disease had a median TTP of 4.2 months (95% CI, 3.3-6.0) compared with 3.4 months (95% CI, 2.7-∞) for chemotherapy-resistant disease. The RR was 33% (95% CI, 14.2%-51.8%) in patients with chemosensitive disease and 17% (95% CI, 0%-34.4%) in those with chemoresistant disease. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were fatigue (20%), dyspnea (12%), and anemia (12%). CONCLUSION: Bendamustine has modest activity in relapsed SCLC similar to other agents evaluated in this patient population.
INTRODUCTION: To determine the time to progression (TTP), response rate (RR), and toxicity for North American patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) treated with bendamustine in the second- or third-line setting. METHODS:Patients with relapsed, histologically confirmed SCLC were eligible for enrollment on study. The study population included patients with both chemotherapy-sensitive and chemotherapy-resistant disease treated with up to two prior lines of chemotherapy. Patients were treated with 120 mg/m of bendamustine on days 1 and 2 of a 21-day cycle for up to six cycles. Primary end point was TTP; secondary end points included toxicity, RR, and overall survival. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were accrued, 50 patients met eligibility for enrollment. The median age of patients was 62, and 56% were men. Twenty-nine patients (58%) had chemotherapy-sensitive disease. Median TTP was 4.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.3-5.4), median overall survival was 4.8 months (95% CI, 3.8-6.3), and the RR was 26% (95% CI, 13.3%-39.5%). Patients with chemosensitive disease had a median TTP of 4.2 months (95% CI, 3.3-6.0) compared with 3.4 months (95% CI, 2.7-∞) for chemotherapy-resistant disease. The RR was 33% (95% CI, 14.2%-51.8%) in patients with chemosensitive disease and 17% (95% CI, 0%-34.4%) in those with chemoresistant disease. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were fatigue (20%), dyspnea (12%), and anemia (12%). CONCLUSION:Bendamustine has modest activity in relapsed SCLC similar to other agents evaluated in this patient population.
Authors: N Ebi; K Kubota; Y Nishiwaki; F Hojo; T Matsumoto; R Kakinuma; H Ohmatsu; I Sekine; M Yokosaki; K Gotoh; H Yamamoto; T Kodama Journal: Jpn J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-06 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: J von Pawel; J H Schiller; F A Shepherd; S Z Fields; J P Kleisbauer; N G Chrysson; D J Stewart; P I Clark; M C Palmer; A Depierre; J Carmichael; J B Krebs; G Ross; S R Lane; R Gralla Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Mary E R O'Brien; Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu; Hristo Tsekov; Yaroslav Shparyk; Branka Cuceviá; Gabor Juhasz; Nicholas Thatcher; Graham A Ross; Graham C Dane; Theresa Crofts Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-12-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Brad S Kahl; Nancy L Bartlett; John P Leonard; Ling Chen; Kristen Ganjoo; Michael E Williams; Myron S Czuczman; K Sue Robinson; Robin Joyce; Richard H van der Jagt; Bruce D Cheson Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-01-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Wolfgang U Knauf; Toshko Lissichkov; Ali Aldaoud; Anna Liberati; Javier Loscertales; Raoul Herbrecht; Gunnar Juliusson; Gerhard Postner; Liana Gercheva; Stefan Goranov; Martin Becker; Hans-Joerg Fricke; Francoise Huguet; Ilaria Del Giudice; Peter Klein; Lothar Tremmel; Karlheinz Merkle; Marco Montillo Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-08-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jonathan W Friedberg; Philip Cohen; Ling Chen; K Sue Robinson; Andres Forero-Torres; Ann S La Casce; Luis E Fayad; Alberto Bessudo; Elber S Camacho; Michael E Williams; Richard H van der Jagt; Jennifer W Oliver; Bruce D Cheson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-01-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jan A Stratmann; Radha Timalsina; Akin Atmaca; Vivian Rosery; Nikolaj Frost; Jürgen Alt; Cornelius F Waller; Niels Reinmuth; Gernot Rohde; Felix C Saalfeld; Aaron Becker von Rose; Fabian Acker; Lukas Aspacher; Miriam Möller; Martin Sebastian Journal: Ther Adv Med Oncol Date: 2022-06-04 Impact factor: 5.485