Virtual Library
Start Your Search
L. Li
Author of
-
+
P3.01 - Poster Session/ Treatment of Advanced Diseases – NSCLC (ID 208)
- Event: WCLC 2015
- Type: Poster
- Track: Treatment of Advanced Diseases - NSCLC
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 9/09/2015, 09:30 - 17:00, Exhibit Hall (Hall B+C)
-
+
P3.01-058 - <em>nab</em>-Paclitaxel + Carboplatin in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer NSCLC: Dose Modification Analysis (ID 1570)
09:30 - 09:30 | Author(s): L. Li
- Abstract
Background:
Chemotherapy dose modifications may impact clinical outcomes in patients with cancer. In a phase III trial, first-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC with nab-paclitaxel plus carboplatin (nab-P/C) significantly improved the overall response rate (ORR; primary endpoint) compared with solvent-based paclitaxel plus C (sb-P/C; 33% vs 25%; P = 0.005; Socinski et al. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2055-2062). This exploratory analysis examined the correlation between patients receiving protocol-specified dose modifications and clinical outcomes in the phase III trial.
Methods:
Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IIIB/IV NSCLC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease received either nab-P 100 mg/m[2] on days 1, 8, and 15 or sb-P 200 mg/m[2] on day 1, both in combination with C AUC 6 on day 1, every 21 days (randomized 1:1). ORR and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed by blinded, centralized review. P values for ORR were based on the chi-square test, and those for overall survival (OS) and PFS were based on the log-rank test. Patients who discontinued treatment before cycle 3 or remained on treatment after 6 months were excluded from this analysis unless otherwise specified.
Results:
Dose modification and clinical outcomes for patients treated for ≥ 3 cycles but ≤ 6 months are shown in the Table. In the nab-P/C arm, 268 of 310 patients (86%) who were treated for ≥ 3 cycles and ≤ 6 months had a dose modification compared with 200 of 319 (63%) in the sb-P/C arm. In the nab-P/C cohort, ORR and PFS were significantly higher in patients who received a dose modification vs those who did not (Table), possibly due to better tolerability and longer treatment duration. In the sb-P/C arm, there were no differences in efficacy outcomes between either group. As predicted, patients with a lower numerical incidence of toxicity were those that did not require dose modifications.
Conclusion:
This exploratory analysis suggested that, in this patient subset, protocol-specified dose modifications did not negatively impact the primary endpoint of ORR and in fact resulted in a greater ORR for those receiving nab-P/C. Figure 1
