Suppr超能文献

培美曲塞对比多西他赛二线治疗非小细胞肺癌:一项多中心、随机、探索性临床试验在中国患者中的结果和亚组分析。

Pemetrexed versus docetaxel in second line non-small-cell lung cancer: results and subsets analyses of a multi-center, randomized, exploratory trial in Chinese patients.

机构信息

Department of Medical Oncology, Changzheng Hospital, Second Military Medical University, No. 415, Fengyang Road, Shanghai 200070, China.

出版信息

Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2012 Oct;25(5):364-70. doi: 10.1016/j.pupt.2012.06.008. Epub 2012 Jul 3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Pemetrexed and docetaxel are established therapies in second line non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Comparative data, concerning the two agents in the designated settings, however, are lacking in Chinese patients who account for the largest lung cancer population in the world.

METHODS AND PATIENTS

We designed and performed a multi-center, randomized, exploratory clinical trial of pemetrexed compared with docetaxel in second line chemotherapy in Chinese NSCLC patients. Eligible patients with histological or cytological diagnosis of stage IIIB or IV NSCLC, who were not suitable for curative therapy and had failed from prior first line chemotherapy regimen for at least 4 weeks, were randomized to receive either pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) intravenously day 1 with vitamin B12, folic acid, and dexamethasone, or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) intravenously day 1 with dexamethasone. Both regimens were implemented once every 21 days for 2 cycles. This study was designed to be a non-inferiority trial that compared tumor response for overall response rate (ORR) between the two drugs as primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), Karnofsky performance status (KPS) scores and toxicities.

RESULTS

260 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy of either pemetrexed (132 patients) or docetaxel (128 patients). 106 patients in pemetrexed arm and 102 patients in docetaxel arm were evaluable for efficacy. The efficacy of pemetrexed was equivalent to that of docetaxel in the second-line treatment for Chinese NSCLC (ORR: pemetrexed vs. docetaxel = 9.4% vs. 4.9, p = 0.285, DCR: pemetrexed vs. docetaxel = 67.2% vs. 69.6%, p = 0.685). And pemetrexed seemed to slightly promote patients' average KPS score when comparing with docetaxel, although the difference was without statistical significance (changes of average KPS scores: pemetrexed vs. docetaxel = 0.28 ± 5.93 vs. -1.67 ± 8.57, p = 0.149). Patients receiving pemetrexed experienced significantly lower incidences of grade 3/4 neutropenia (7.0% vs. 27.6%, p < 0.001) and leucocytopenia (4.7% vs. 22.8%, p < 0.001) than those who received docetaxel. Also, there were lower incidences of alopecia, stomatitis, and neural abnormality for patients receiving pemetrexed than those receiving docetaxel. Incidence of serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase elevation, however, was higher in pemetrexed arm than in docetaxel arm (32.3% vs. 14.9%, p = 0.013). In addition, age ≥ 60 patients benefit from pemetrexed with equivalent efficacies yet much lower toxicities compared to docetaxel (DCR: pemetrexed vs. docetaxel = 66.67% vs. 81.58%, p = 0.146; grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities: pemetrexed vs. docetaxel = 17.25% vs. 39.6%, p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

Treatment with pemetrexed resulted in equivalent efficacy outcomes and better safety profiles compared with docetaxel in second-line therapy for advanced NSCLC in Chinese lung cancer population. And age ≥ 60 patients may benefit from second-line single pemetrexed.

摘要

背景

培美曲塞和多西他赛是二线治疗非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的既定疗法。然而,在中国这个全球最大的肺癌人群中,缺乏关于这两种药物在指定环境下的比较数据。

方法和患者

我们设计并进行了一项多中心、随机、探索性临床试验,比较培美曲塞与多西他赛在二线化疗中的疗效,纳入的患者为组织学或细胞学诊断为 IIIB 或 IV 期 NSCLC、不适合根治性治疗且一线化疗方案至少失败 4 周的患者。将符合条件的患者随机分为培美曲塞 500mg/m2 静脉滴注第 1 天,同时给予维生素 B12、叶酸和地塞米松,或多西他赛 75mg/m2 静脉滴注第 1 天,同时给予地塞米松。两种方案均每 21 天实施一次,共进行 2 个周期。本研究设计为非劣效性试验,主要终点为比较两种药物的总体缓解率(ORR)作为肿瘤反应的指标。次要终点包括疾病控制率(DCR)、卡诺夫斯基表现状态(KPS)评分和毒性。

结果

共纳入 260 例患者,并随机分配接受培美曲塞(132 例)或多西他赛(128 例)化疗。培美曲塞组和多西他赛组分别有 106 例和 102 例患者可评估疗效。培美曲塞在二线治疗中国 NSCLC 中的疗效与多西他赛相当(ORR:培美曲塞 vs. 多西他赛=9.4% vs. 4.9%,p=0.285,DCR:培美曲塞 vs. 多西他赛=67.2% vs. 69.6%,p=0.685)。与多西他赛相比,培美曲塞似乎略微提高了患者的平均 KPS 评分,但差异无统计学意义(平均 KPS 评分变化:培美曲塞 vs. 多西他赛=0.28±5.93 vs. -1.67±8.57,p=0.149)。接受培美曲塞治疗的患者发生 3/4 级中性粒细胞减少症(7.0% vs. 27.6%,p<0.001)和白细胞减少症(4.7% vs. 22.8%,p<0.001)的发生率明显低于接受多西他赛治疗的患者。接受培美曲塞治疗的患者发生脱发、口腔炎和神经异常的发生率也低于接受多西他赛治疗的患者。然而,培美曲塞组血清谷氨酸草酰乙酸转氨酶升高的发生率高于多西他赛组(32.3% vs. 14.9%,p=0.013)。此外,年龄≥60 岁的患者接受培美曲塞治疗的疗效相当,但毒性明显较低(DCR:培美曲塞 vs. 多西他赛=66.67% vs. 81.58%,p=0.146;3/4 级血液学毒性:培美曲塞 vs. 多西他赛=17.25% vs. 39.6%,p=0.016)。

结论

培美曲塞在二线治疗中国 NSCLC 患者中与多西他赛相比,疗效相当,安全性更好。年龄≥60 岁的患者可能受益于二线单药培美曲塞治疗。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验