Journal
CANCER
Volume 118, Issue 9, Pages 2525-2531Publisher
WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.26522
Keywords
personalized chemotherapy; lung cancer; excision repair cross complementing gene 1; ribonucleotide reductase M1 subunit; gemcitabine; carboplatin; docetaxel; gefitinib
Categories
Funding
- National Institutes of Health [NIH 1 R21 CA106166-01]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
BACKGROUND: Excision repair cross complementing 1 (ERCC1) and ribonucleotide reductase M1 (RRM1) are molecular determinants that predict sensitivity or resistance to platinum agents and gemcitabine, respectively. Tailored therapy using these molecular determinants suggested patient benefit in a previously reported phase 2 trial. Here, we report an individual patient analysis of prospectively accrued patients who were treated with the personalized therapy approach versus other standard, noncustomized approaches. METHODS: Patients who had nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with extranodal metastatic disease and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0/1 were accrued to 4 phase 2 clinical trials conducted at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center: Trial A (first-line carboplatin/gemcitabine followed by docetaxel), Trial B (docetaxel and gefitinib in patients aged similar to 70 years), Trial C (combination therapy with carboplatin/paclitaxel/atrasentan), and Trial D (personalized therapy based on ERCC1 and RRM1 expression). Patients with low RRM1/low ERCC1 expression received gemcitabine/carboplatin, patients with low RRM1/high ERCC1 expression received gemcitabine/docetaxel, patients with high RRM1/low ERCC1 expression received docetaxel/carboplatin, and patients with high RRM1/high ERCC1 expression received vinorelbine/docetaxel. Patients who were treated on Trials A, B, and C were pooled together and analyzed as the standard therapy'' group. Patients accrued to Trial D were called the personalized therapy'' group. Individual patient data were updated as of February 8, 2011. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: There were statistically significant improvements between the personalized therapy group versus the standard therapy group in response (44% vs 22%; P = .002), OS (median: 13.3 months vs 8.9 months; P = .016), and PFS (median: 7.0 months vs 4.3 months; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: The results from individual patient analyses suggest that ERCC1 and RRM1/tailored selection of first-line therapy improved survival over standard treatment-selection approaches. Cancer 2012; 118: 2525-31. (C) 2011 American Cancer Society.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available