Clinical Data Suggest Potential Versatility of Pemetrexed-Based Regimens in Lung Cancer

Publication
Article
OncologyONCOLOGY Vol 21 No 14
Volume 21
Issue 14

Pemetrexed (Alimta) showed additional utility in the treatment of non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Pemetrexed (Alimta) showed additional utility in the treatment of non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), according to data presented at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Chicago (abstract 7517). Results from a phase III study suggest that a first-line pemetrexed-based regimen may deliver less toxicity than a commonly used therapy in advanced NSCLC.

A prospective, randomized, multicenter phase III study was conducted to compare pemetrexed plus carboplatin with the commonly used regimen of gemcitabine (Gemzar) plus carboplatin. The study, conducted by the Norwegian Lung Cancer Group, enrolled 446 chemonaive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC. The primary purpose of the study was to evaluate if pemetrexed/carboplatin provided increased quality-of-life benefits while offering comparable survival data. As such, the primary endpoint was quality of life (defined as nausea/vomiting, dyspnea, and fatigue) and the secondary endpoint was overall survival.

At the time the study was reported, 384 patients had been analyzed for toxicity and fewer patients in the pemetrexed arm had experienced grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (48 vs 107, P < .001), leukopenia (44 vs 89, P < .001), and granulocytopenia (78 vs 98, P = .02). More patients in the gemcitabine arm received transfusion of platelets (5 vs 19, P = .02). No difference in survival had been observed.

"The patients in this study received a comparable quality-of-life benefit whether they received Alimta and carboplatin or Gemzar and carboplatin," said Bjorn Henning Gronberg, MD, of St. Olavs University Hospital in Norway and the study's principal investigator. "Patients on the Alimta arm also appeared to benefit from a lower toxicity profile."

Recent Videos
Patients with lung cancer who achieve a complete response with neoadjuvant therapy may not experience additional benefit with adjuvant immunotherapy.
Numerous trials have displayed the evolution of EGFR inhibition alone or with chemotherapy/radiation in the EGFR-mutated lung cancer space.
Thinking about how to sequence additional agents following targeted therapy may be a key consideration in the future of lung cancer care.
Endobronchial ultrasound, robotic bronchoscopy, or other expensive procedures may exacerbate financial toxicity for patients seeking lung cancer care.
Patients with mediastinal lymph node involved-lung cancer may benefit from chemoimmunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting.
Advancements in antibody drug conjugates, bispecific therapies, and other targeted agents may hold promise in lung cancer management.
Stressing the importance of prompt AE disclosure before they become severe can ensure that a patient can still undergo resection with curative intent.
Thomas Marron, MD, PhD, presented a session on clinical data that established standards of care for stage II and III lung cancer treatment at CFS 2025.
Decreasing the low-dose bath of proton therapy to the body may limit the impact of radiation on lymphocytes and affect tumor response.
According to Eyub Akdemir, MD, reducing EDIC may be feasible without compromising target coverage to reduce anticipated lymphopenia rates.
Related Content