A phase II study with vinorelbine, gemcitabine and cisplatin in the treatment of patients with stage IIIb–IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Abstract

In our phase II study an acceptable and effective agent like cisplatin was used in combination with vinorelbine and gemcitabine in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). These two new cytostatic drugs have demonstrated, when used as a single-agent treatment, effective response rates (vinorelbine) and minimum toxicity (gemcitabine). The following schedule was used: (i) vinorelbine 25 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 8; (ii) gemcitabine 1000 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 8; and (iii) cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 on day 8. The schedule was repeated every 21 days, with a maximum of six cycles per patient. A total of 31 patients with a mean Karnofsky performance status of 90% were evaluated and 29 of them were finally eligible. Of the patients, five (16.1%) were at stage IIIb and the remainder (83.9%) were at stage IV. The overall response rate was 65% (20 patients); six patients (19.4%) had complete response (CR) and 14 (45.2%) had partial response (PR). Two patients (6.5%) had stable disease and seven (22.6%) had progressive disease. The most notable toxicity was hematologic. Leukoneutropenia was mainly revealed after the third or fourth cycle and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) was administered in 24 patients (77.4%). Mild anemia was found in almost all patients after the third or fourth cycle (Hb 10–11 g/dl) and eight patients (25.8%) required erythropoietin (EPO). Thrombocytopenia was more often observed compared with other known chemotherapeutic regimens; six patients (19.4%) had grade I thrombocytopenia and therapy was delayed in another four patients (12.9%) due to this complication. Non-hematologic toxicity was mild and well tolerated and consisted of alopecia (54.8%), nausea and vomiting (12.9%), constipation (12.9%), peripheral neuropathy (9.6%), diarrhea (6.5%), stomatitis (3.2%) and local phlebitis (3.2%). The examined combination provides us with one of the best overall response rates reported, however at the cost of remarkable hematologic toxicity. Therefore, it would be better applied in patients with good performance status. The high response rates give us hope of using this combination as a neoadjuvant regimen.