The Experts below are selected from a list of 117 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
M Fukuoka - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Randomised phase III trial of irinotecan combined with cisplatin for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer
British Journal of Cancer, 2003Co-Authors: S Negoro, S Kudoh, N Masuda, Y Takada, T Sugiura, N Katakami, Y Ariyoshi, Y Ohashi, H Niitani, M FukuokaAbstract:To determine a standard combination chemotherapy for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we conducted a phase III trial of irinotecan (CPT-11) to test the hypotheses that CPT-11+cisplatin is superior to cisplatin+Vindesine and that CPT-11 monotherapy is not inferior to cisplatin+Vindesine. A total of 398 patients with previously untreated NSCLC were randomised to receive cisplatin+CPT-11 (CPT-P), cisplatin+Vindesine (VDS-P) or CPT-11 alone (CPT). In the CPT-P arm, CPT-11 60 mg m^−2 was administered on days 1, 8 and 15, and cisplatin 80 mg m^−2 was administered on day 1. In the VDS-P arm, cisplatin 80 mg m^−2 was administered on day 1, and Vindesine 3 mg m^−2 was administered on days 1, 8 and 15. In the CPT arm, CPT-11 100 mg m^−2 was administered on days 1, 8 and 15. The median survival time was 50.0 weeks for patients on CPT-P, 45.6 weeks for those on VDS-P and 46.0 weeks for those on CPT ( P =0.115, CPT-P vs VDS-P; P =0.089, CPT vs VDS-P), and the hazard ratio was 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.65–1.11) for CPT-P vs VDS-P and 0.83 (0.64–1.09) for CPT vs VDS-P. The response rate was 43.7% for patients on CPT-P, 31.7% for those on VDS-P and 20.5% for those on CPT. Major adverse reactions were grade 4 neutropenia observed in 37, 54 and 8% of the patients on CPT-P, VDS-P and CPT, respectively; and grades 3 and 4 diarrhoea observed in 12, 3 and 15% of the patients, respectively. CPT-P therapy produces comparable survival to VDS-P in patients with advanced NSCLC. CPT-11 monotherapy is not inferior to VDS-P in terms of survival. The CPT-11-containing regimen is one of the most efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of advanced NSCLC.
-
a randomized trial in inoperable non small cell lung cancer Vindesine and cisplatin versus mitomycin Vindesine and cisplatin versus etoposide and cisplatin alternating with Vindesine and mitomycin
Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1991Co-Authors: M Fukuoka, Masaaki Kawahara, Noriyuki Masuda, K Furuse, S Negoro, Minoru Takada, Kaoru Matsui, Nobuhide Takifuji, S Kudoh, M OgawaraAbstract:Patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomly assigned to receive one of three dosage regimens: (1) Vindesine and cisplatin (VP); (2) mitomycin, Vindesine, and cisplatin (MVP); or (3) etoposide and cisplatin alternating with Vindesine and mitomycin (EP/VM). In 199 assessable patients, the response rates were VP, 33%; MVP, 43%; and EP/VM, 19%. The addition of mitomycin to the VP regimen did not significantly improve the response rate. The response rate was significantly lower with the EP/VM regimen than with the MVP regimen (P less than .01). The median survival times were VP, 50 weeks; MVP, 42 weeks; and EP/VM, 40 weeks. These differences were not significant. Grade III or IV thrombocytopenia was significantly greater (P less than .01) in MVP patients (22%) than in the VP (5%). Other toxicities were similar in the three groups. Analyses of prognostic factors showed that treatment with MVP, sex, and histologic classification (squamous cell carcinoma) were predictive of improved ...
Nagahiro Saijo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
oncoprotein 18 overexpression increases the sensitivity to Vindesine in the human lung carcinoma cells
Cancer, 2001Co-Authors: Kazuto Nishio, Takashi Nakamura, Fumihiko Kanzawa, Tomohide Tamura, Nagahiro SaijoAbstract:BACKGROUND Oncoprotein 18 (op18) was first isolated as a molecule overexpressed in several malignant cells, suggesting a function of op18 in malignant processes, such as differentiation in hematologic malignancies, op18 also was found to enhance microtubule deassembly in the cells. Antimitotic agents that bind to tubulin have been used for chemotherapy to treat solid tumors, such as lung carcinoma. Vinca alkaloids, such as Vindesine and vincristine, have commonly been used for chemotherapy of nonsmall cell lung carcinoma. The authors examined the role of op18 in the sensitivity of human lung carcinoma cells to antimitotic agents. METHODS Expression of op18 mRNA was detected in all 17 lung carcinoma cell lines tested by Northern blotting. Oncoprotein 18 cDNA was transfected to SBC-3 human lung carcinoma cells, and the stable transfectants, SBC-3/op1-3, were isolated. The sensitivity of these transfectants against antimitotic agents were examined by the MTT assay in vitro. Cell cycle distribution of the transfectants on DNA histogram was analyzed by flow cytometry. RESULTS Oncoprotein 18–transfected cells showed higher sensitivity to Vindesine and vincristine, but not to taxanes. Vindesine-exposure increased the G2/M population of the cell cycle in the Mock transfectants, but not in SBC-3/op1, suggesting that the cell cycle dynamics were altered by op18 expression in SBC-3/op1. CONCLUSION Oncoprotein 18 expression is associated with lung carcinoma cell sensitivity to Vindesine and may be able to serve as a surrogate marker for the chemosensitivity to Vinca alkaloids in human lung carcinomas. Cancer 2001;91:1494–9. © 2001 American Cancer Society.
-
characterisation of a Vindesine resistant human small cell lung cancer cell line
British Journal of Cancer, 1993Co-Authors: S Ohta, Kazuto Nishio, S Kubo, Makoto Nishio, Tohru Ohmori, T Takahashi, Nagahiro SaijoAbstract:We established a Vindesine-resistant (x 11.6) human small-cell lung cancer cell line (H69/VDS) by stepwise exposure of parent line H69 to Vindesine. H69/VDS showed cross-resistance to taxol (x 10.1), vincristine (x 6.9) and colchicine (x 3.4) but not to doxorubicin, cisplatin or etoposide. There was no significant difference in intracellular [3H]-vincristine and doxorubicin accumulation between H69 and H69/VDS cells. The human mdr1 mRNA was not detected in either of the cell lines. These results indicated that H69/VDS did not express a typical multidrug resistant phenotype. Addition of 20 microM verapamil enhanced the growth inhibitory effect of Vindesine on both H69/VDS (x 12.0) and H69 cells (x 3.8). The amount of total tubulin in H69/VDS cells was lower than that in the H69 parental cells. No significant increase was observed in the amount of total and polymerised tubulins of H69 cells. In H69/VDS cells, however, verapamil increased the amount of total tubulin to the level of parental cells, but decreased the amount of polymerised tubulin. Modulation of tubulin may play a role in the resistance to Vindesine.
-
a randomised clinical trial of Vindesine plus cisplatin versus mitomycin plus Vindesine and cisplatin in advanced non small cell lung cancer
European Journal of Cancer and Clinical Oncology, 1991Co-Authors: Tetsu Shinkai, Kenji Eguchi, Yasutsuna Sasaki, Tomohide Tamura, Akira Kojima, Fumihiro Oshita, Nagahiro SaijoAbstract:Abstract This trial was carried out to evaluate the therapeutic benefit of the addition of mitomycin to Vindesine plus cisplatin (80 mg/m 2 ) in 126 previously untreated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. 124 patients were evaluable for toxicity and survival and 122 for response. No patient achieved complete response. The partial response rate (PR) in the Vindesine plus cisplatin (VP) and mitomycin plus Vindesine and cisplatin (MVP) groups were 23% (1462) vs. 35% (2160) ( P = 0.13) with a median duration of response of 23 vs. 37 weeks ( P = 0.071), respectively. Time to progression (TTP) and survival time (ST) were similar for both treatment arms [median TTP; 14 vs. 21 weeks ( P = 0.10), median ST; 9.1 vs. 10.5 months ( P = 0.94), respectively]. No difference in the frequency of side-effects was observed except that WHO grade 3 and 4 leukopenia was higher in the MVP group. In multivariate analysis, the significant predictors of survival were serum albumin, sex, performance status, lactate dehydrogenase and stage. In conclusion, the addition of mitomycin to the VP regimen appears to have limited value in advanced NSCLC.
Jens Benn Sørensen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
phase ii study of gemcitabine and Vindesine in patients with previously untreated non resectable non small cell lung cancer
British Journal of Cancer, 1999Co-Authors: Jens Benn Sørensen, Bengt Bergman, A L Nielsen, M Krarup, P Dombernowsky, H H HansenAbstract:Phase II study of gemcitabine and Vindesine in patients with previously untreated non-resectable non-small-cell lung cancer
-
Is there a role for Vindesine in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer?
Investigational New Drugs, 1993Co-Authors: Jens Benn Sørensen, Heine H. HansenAbstract:Vindesine is a semisynthetic derivative of vinblastine which has been evaluated in clinical studies since the late 1970's. The literature on Vindesine in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer has been reviewed and all aspects of Vindesine treatment in this disease has been covered. It is concluded that Vindesine as a single agent yields a response rate of 18% based on the treatment of 295 patients included in phase II trials (95% confidence limits 13%–22%). No difference was observed among the three major histologic types of non-small cell lung cancer. In phase III trials, the response rate and confidence limits are at a similar level. Combination chemotherapy including Vindesine plus cisplatin ranks among the most active treatments in non-small cell lung cancer and is as active as etoposide plus cisplatin, both with respect to response rate and survival. It has not been documented that the addition of one or two other drugs to the combination of Vindesine yields an increase in survival. When best supportive care was compared with a combination of Vindesine plus cisplatin, the group with chemotherapy was attributed a survival advantage in all three studies published, and the difference was statistically significant in two of these three studies. Thus, Vindesine has a well documented activity in non-small cell lung cancer and ranks among the most active single agents in this disease. Vindesine is also part of several active combination chemotherapies among which the combination of Vindesine plus cisplatin is particularly interesting, because it has been repeatedly shown to prolong survival as compared to supportive care. Especially this latter point leads to the conclusion that there is a role for Vindesine in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. However, the concept of chemotherapy in this disease remains investigational even though the advances seen in recent years clearly merit further studies.
Masaaki Kawahara - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
phase iii randomized trial of docetaxel plus cisplatin versus Vindesine plus cisplatin in patients with stage iv non small cell lung cancer the japanese taxotere lung cancer study group
Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2004Co-Authors: Kaoru Kubota, Koshiro Watanabe, Hideo Kunitoh, Kazumasa Noda, Yukito Ichinose, Nobuyuki Katakami, Takahiko Sugiura, Masaaki Kawahara, Akira Yokoyama, Soichiro YokotaAbstract:Purpose Few randomized trials have demonstrated survival benefit of combination chemotherapy involving new agents plus cisplatin compared with classic combination chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary aim of this study was to test whether docetaxel plus cisplatin (DC) improves survival compared with Vindesine plus cisplatin (VdsC) in patients with previously untreated stage IV NSCLC. Patients and Methods Eligible, stage IV, chemotherapy-naive patients (n = 311) were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel 60 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 plus cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of a 3- or 4-week cycle, or Vindesine 3 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 plus cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of a 4-week cycle. Cross-over administration of docetaxel and Vindesine was prohibited for both treatment groups. Results Overall, 302 patients were eligible for evaluation. The DC arm demonstrated significant improvements compared with the VdsC arm in overall respons...
-
a randomized trial in inoperable non small cell lung cancer Vindesine and cisplatin versus mitomycin Vindesine and cisplatin versus etoposide and cisplatin alternating with Vindesine and mitomycin
Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1991Co-Authors: M Fukuoka, Masaaki Kawahara, Noriyuki Masuda, K Furuse, S Negoro, Minoru Takada, Kaoru Matsui, Nobuhide Takifuji, S Kudoh, M OgawaraAbstract:Patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomly assigned to receive one of three dosage regimens: (1) Vindesine and cisplatin (VP); (2) mitomycin, Vindesine, and cisplatin (MVP); or (3) etoposide and cisplatin alternating with Vindesine and mitomycin (EP/VM). In 199 assessable patients, the response rates were VP, 33%; MVP, 43%; and EP/VM, 19%. The addition of mitomycin to the VP regimen did not significantly improve the response rate. The response rate was significantly lower with the EP/VM regimen than with the MVP regimen (P less than .01). The median survival times were VP, 50 weeks; MVP, 42 weeks; and EP/VM, 40 weeks. These differences were not significant. Grade III or IV thrombocytopenia was significantly greater (P less than .01) in MVP patients (22%) than in the VP (5%). Other toxicities were similar in the three groups. Analyses of prognostic factors showed that treatment with MVP, sex, and histologic classification (squamous cell carcinoma) were predictive of improved ...
S Negoro - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Randomised phase III trial of irinotecan combined with cisplatin for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer
British Journal of Cancer, 2003Co-Authors: S Negoro, S Kudoh, N Masuda, Y Takada, T Sugiura, N Katakami, Y Ariyoshi, Y Ohashi, H Niitani, M FukuokaAbstract:To determine a standard combination chemotherapy for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we conducted a phase III trial of irinotecan (CPT-11) to test the hypotheses that CPT-11+cisplatin is superior to cisplatin+Vindesine and that CPT-11 monotherapy is not inferior to cisplatin+Vindesine. A total of 398 patients with previously untreated NSCLC were randomised to receive cisplatin+CPT-11 (CPT-P), cisplatin+Vindesine (VDS-P) or CPT-11 alone (CPT). In the CPT-P arm, CPT-11 60 mg m^−2 was administered on days 1, 8 and 15, and cisplatin 80 mg m^−2 was administered on day 1. In the VDS-P arm, cisplatin 80 mg m^−2 was administered on day 1, and Vindesine 3 mg m^−2 was administered on days 1, 8 and 15. In the CPT arm, CPT-11 100 mg m^−2 was administered on days 1, 8 and 15. The median survival time was 50.0 weeks for patients on CPT-P, 45.6 weeks for those on VDS-P and 46.0 weeks for those on CPT ( P =0.115, CPT-P vs VDS-P; P =0.089, CPT vs VDS-P), and the hazard ratio was 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.65–1.11) for CPT-P vs VDS-P and 0.83 (0.64–1.09) for CPT vs VDS-P. The response rate was 43.7% for patients on CPT-P, 31.7% for those on VDS-P and 20.5% for those on CPT. Major adverse reactions were grade 4 neutropenia observed in 37, 54 and 8% of the patients on CPT-P, VDS-P and CPT, respectively; and grades 3 and 4 diarrhoea observed in 12, 3 and 15% of the patients, respectively. CPT-P therapy produces comparable survival to VDS-P in patients with advanced NSCLC. CPT-11 monotherapy is not inferior to VDS-P in terms of survival. The CPT-11-containing regimen is one of the most efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of advanced NSCLC.
-
a randomized trial in inoperable non small cell lung cancer Vindesine and cisplatin versus mitomycin Vindesine and cisplatin versus etoposide and cisplatin alternating with Vindesine and mitomycin
Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1991Co-Authors: M Fukuoka, Masaaki Kawahara, Noriyuki Masuda, K Furuse, S Negoro, Minoru Takada, Kaoru Matsui, Nobuhide Takifuji, S Kudoh, M OgawaraAbstract:Patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomly assigned to receive one of three dosage regimens: (1) Vindesine and cisplatin (VP); (2) mitomycin, Vindesine, and cisplatin (MVP); or (3) etoposide and cisplatin alternating with Vindesine and mitomycin (EP/VM). In 199 assessable patients, the response rates were VP, 33%; MVP, 43%; and EP/VM, 19%. The addition of mitomycin to the VP regimen did not significantly improve the response rate. The response rate was significantly lower with the EP/VM regimen than with the MVP regimen (P less than .01). The median survival times were VP, 50 weeks; MVP, 42 weeks; and EP/VM, 40 weeks. These differences were not significant. Grade III or IV thrombocytopenia was significantly greater (P less than .01) in MVP patients (22%) than in the VP (5%). Other toxicities were similar in the three groups. Analyses of prognostic factors showed that treatment with MVP, sex, and histologic classification (squamous cell carcinoma) were predictive of improved ...
