A randomized, open-label, phase III trial comparing amrubicin versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer

Background Amrubicin is approved for treating non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small-cell lung cancer. However, no direct comparisons between amrubicin and docetaxel, a standard treatment for NSCLC, have been reported. Patients and methods We conducted a randomized phase III trial of Japanese NSCLC patients after one or two chemotherapy regimens. Patients were randomized to amrubicin (35 mg/m2 on days 1-3 every 3 weeks) or docetaxel (60 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks). Outcomes included progression-free survival, overall survival, tumor responses, and safety. Results Between October 2010 and June 2012, 202 patients were enrolled across 32 institutions. Median progression-free survival (3.6 versus 3.0 months; P = 0.54) and overall survival (14.6 versus 13.5 months; P = 0.86) were comparable in the amrubicin and docetaxel groups, respectively. The overall response rate was 14.4% (14/97) and 19.6% (19/97) in the amrubicin and docetaxel groups, respectively (P = 0.45). The disease control rate was 55.7% in both groups. Adverse events occurred in all patients, and included grade ≥3 neutropenia occurred in 82.7% and 78.8% of patients in the amrubicin and docetaxel groups, respectively, grade ≥3 leukopenia occurred in 63.3% and 70.7%, and grade ≥3 febrile neutropenia occurred in 13.3% and 18.2% of patients in the amrubicin and docetaxel groups, respectively. Of eight cardiac-related events in the amrubicin group, three were considered related to amrubicin and resolved without treatment discontinuation. Conclusions This was the first phase III study to compare amrubicin and docetaxel in patients with pretreated NSCLC. Amrubicin did not significantly improve the primary endpoint of PFS compared with docetaxel. Clinical trial registration NCT01207011 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

[1]  Lynne M Connelly,et al.  Fisher's Exact Test. , 2016, Medsurg nursing : official journal of the Academy of Medical-Surgical Nurses.

[2]  C. Rudin,et al.  Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  L. Crinò,et al.  Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in Advanced Squamous-Cell Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  A. Jemal,et al.  Global cancer statistics, 2012 , 2015, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[5]  M. Nishimura,et al.  A phase II study of amrubicin as a third-line or fourth-line chemotherapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer: Hokkaido Lung Cancer Clinical Study Group Trial (HOT) 0901. , 2013, The oncologist.

[6]  Y. Tomizawa,et al.  A phase II study of amrubicin, a synthetic 9-aminoanthracycline, in patients with previously treated lung cancer. , 2010, Lung cancer.

[7]  Y. Ichinose,et al.  Results of a phase I/II trial of amrubicin (AMR) in combination with cisplatin (CDDP) as a first-line treatment in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). , 2010 .

[8]  L. Schwartz,et al.  New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). , 2009, European journal of cancer.

[9]  Kenji Eguchi,et al.  Phase III study, V-15-32, of gefitinib versus docetaxel in previously treated Japanese patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[10]  T. Nakano,et al.  Phase II study of amrubicin, 9-amino-anthracycline, in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a West Japan Thoracic Oncology Group (WJTOG) study , 2007, Investigational New Drugs.

[11]  S. Kudoh,et al.  Multicenter phase II study of amrubicin, 9-amino-anthracycline, in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (Study 1): West Japan Thoracic Oncology Group (WJTOG) trial , 2006, Investigational New Drugs.

[12]  M. Fukuoka,et al.  Phase I/II study of amrubicin, a novel 9-aminoanthracycline, in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer , 2005, Investigational New Drugs.

[13]  S. Lippman,et al.  Type II chemotherapy-related cardiac dysfunction: time to recognize a new entity. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  T. Mukohara,et al.  Japanese experience with second-line chemotherapy with low-dose (60 mg/m2) docetaxel in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer , 2001, Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology.

[15]  M. Kris,et al.  Randomized Phase III Trial of Docetaxel Versus Vinorelbine or Ifosfamide in Patients With Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Previously Treated With Platinum-Containing Chemotherapy Regimens , 2000 .

[16]  J. Dancey,et al.  Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus best supportive care in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. , 2000, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  M. Kris,et al.  Randomized phase III trial of docetaxel versus vinorelbine or ifosfamide in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-containing chemotherapy regimens. The TAX 320 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Study Group. , 2000, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[18]  A. Jemal,et al.  Global cancer statistics , 2011, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[19]  Satoko Mizuno,et al.  A New Antitumor Agent Amrubicin Induces Cell Growth Inhibition by Stabilizing Topoisomerase II‐DNA Complex , 1998, Japanese journal of cancer research : Gann.

[20]  K. Eguchi,et al.  Prospective Evaluation of the Feasibility of Cisplatin‐based Chemotherapy for Elderly Lung Cancer Patients with Normal Organ Functions , 1995, Japanese journal of cancer research : Gann.