Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Vindesine”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1986

Random prospective study of vindesine versus vindesine plus high-dose cisplatin versus vindesine plus cisplatin plus mitomycin C in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

In this phase III randomized study, 124 evaluable patients with unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomized to vindesine v cisplatin (120 mg/m2) plus vindesine v cisplatin (60 mg/m2) plus vindesine plus mitomycin C. The objective response rate for cisplatin and vindesine was 27% v 20% for cisplatin, vindesine, and mitomycin C, and 14% for vindesine alone (P = .25 for cisplatin and vindesine v vindesine). The percentage of patients having stable disease (no progression for a minimum of 3 months) was 20% (cisplatin and vindesine), 27% (cisplatin, vindesine, and mitomycin C), and 26% (vindesine alone), respectively. The median survival time for vindesine was 18 weeks, compared with 26 weeks for cisplatin and vindesine and 17 weeks for cisplatin, vindesine, and mitomycin C. Overall survival was not statistically different for cisplatin plus vindesine v vindesine (P = .65). There was no evidence for improved duration of remission or survival of responders with the cisplatin (120 mg/m2) and vindesine arm. This study failed to demonstrate sufficient therapeutic benefit for cisplatin and vindesine (+/- mitomycin C) compared with single-agent vindesine to justify the increased cost and toxicity of these combination regimens.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed1991

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.

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 response. Important factors for improved survival, according to the Cox regression analysis, were the stage of disease, performance status, sex, weight loss before diagnosis, and hemoglobin concentration.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

A phase III randomized trial of cisplatin plus vindesine versus cisplatin plus vindesine plus mitomycin C versus cisplatin plus vindesine plus ifosfamide for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

A randomized trial of chemotherapy in 105 patients with advanced and metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NCSLC) was conducted in order to compare the effect of the additional drug mitomycin C (PVM) or ifosfamide (PVI), to the combination of cisplatin plus vindesine (PV). An objective response rate was observed in 42.8% of the patients treated with PVM, 42.4% with PVI and 28.6% with PV and these response rates were not statistically significant (P > 0.20). No patient achieved the complete response with either of the three regimens. Comparison of the median response durations among the three regimens showed an advantage of PVI over PVM (P < 0.02) and PV (P < 0.05). The median survival times (MST) were similar for all three regimens (PVM, 33.5; PVI, 40.0 and PV, 36.5 weeks); moreover, the difference in survival time between the three regimens of responders was not statistically significant. The univariate analysis showed that significant predictors of survival were performance status (PS) zero (P = 0.0002), limited disease (P = 0.004), no previous weight loss (P = 0.01) and normal serum albumin (P = 0.016), and in multivariate analysis by a stepwise Cox proportional hazard model, these were PS zero (a hazard ratio of 2.3, P = 0.0001) and limited disease (a hazard ratio of 1.9, P = 0.048). Toxicity did not differ among the three treatment regimens.

Aged↗
PubMed1984

Vindesine and cisplatin combination chemotherapy compared with vindesine as a single agent in the management of non-small cell lung cancer: a randomized study.

One hundred and five patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer were included in a randomized trial comparing the activity of vindesine as a single agent with the combination of vindesine and cisplatin. All patients were previously untreated and the majority (70%) had squamous carcinoma. The overall partial response rates in 88 evaluable patients were 7% for vindesine alone and 33% for the combined regime. There were no complete responders in either arm. The median survival of patients treated with vindesine and cisplatin was 11 months, compared with 4 months in those treated with vindesine alone (P = 0.008). Patients showing a partial or complete response to vindesine and cisplatin survived a median duration of 13 months, compared with 7 months for non-responders (P = 0.03). This survival benefit associated with the combination was particularly apparent for patients with ECOG performance status 0 or 1 (median survival greater than 18 months and 13 months respectively), locoregional disease (median survival 14 months) and squamous cell histology (median survival 13 months). Myelo-suppression was greater with the combination but was not a major treatment problem. Neurotoxicity, which was frequently dose-limiting, was of similar severity in both treatment groups. The results indicate that the combination of vindesine and cisplatin is superior to vindesine alone for remission induction in non-small cell lung cancer and confers a significant survival advantage compared with vindesine alone in patients with favourable prognostic factors.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed1987

[A randomized trial comparing vindesine plus cisplatin with mitomycin C, vindesine plus cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer].

Thirty-six evaluable patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer were randomized to treatments involving vindesine (3 mg/m2 X 3) plus cisplatin (80-120 mg/m2) versus mitomycin C (8 mg/m2) plus vindesine (2 mg/m2 X 3) plus cisplatin (80-120 mg/m2). The response rate for the vindesine and cisplatin combination was 29%, versus 47% for the mitomycin C, vindesine and cisplatin combination. There was no evidence of improved duration of response in patients given mitomycin C, vindesine and cisplatin. The median survival for patients given mitomycin C, vindesine and cisplatin was 11.4 months, compared with 10.3 months for those given vindesine and cisplatin. Toxicity was almost comparable for the two treatments. The utility of addition of mitomycin C to vindesine and cisplatin should be evaluated in further investigations.

Adult↗
PubMed1985

Comparison of vindesine plus cisplatin or vindesine plus mitomycin in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Fifty-eight patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer were randomly allocated to receive vindesine (3 mg/m2 every week) plus either cisplatin (80 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) or mitomycin (8 mg/m2 weekly X 3, then every 3 weeks). No patients achieved complete response. Among the 28 patients treated with vindesine plus cisplatin, there were 12 partial responders (42.9%); among the 30 patients treated with vindesine plus mitomycin, there were only three partial responders (10%) (P less than 0.005). The median duration of response was 11.5 weeks (range, 4-25) in the patients treated with vindesine plus cisplatin. The median survival times for patients treated with vindesine plus cisplatin and vindesine plus mitomycin were 10.1 and 10.2 months, respectively; there was no statistical difference in survival time between the two groups. Initial performance status was the strong predictor of patient survival. Toxic effects, including moderate myelosuppression, nephrotoxicity, peripheral neuropathy, and gastrointestinal symptoms, were generally manageable. The combination of vindesine and cisplatin appears to be effective against advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed1983

A 125I-radiolabelled probe for vinblastine and vindesine radioimmunoassays: applications to measurements of vindesine plasma levels in man after intravenous injections and long-term infusions.

The transformation of vinblastine into a reactive acid azide was used for the preparation of a vindesine-glycyl-tyrosine conjugate. This conjugate was radiolabelled [125I] and used as a tracer for the radioimmunoassay of vinblastine and vindesine with antisera developed by the Eli Lilly Research Laboratories and by ourselves. Its higher specific activity as compared to tritiated vinblastine significantly increases the sensitivity of the assay (0.05 microgram/1 as compared to 0.6 microgram/1). It was then possible to monitor vindesine plasma levels for more than 60 h after intravenous bolus injection and to evaluate the elimination rates more accurately. When plasma levels were also measurable using tritiated vinblastine a satisfactory agreement was observed with determinations performed with radioiodinated vindesine-glycyl-tyrosine. Furthermore, the use of a gamma-emitting probe simplifies the radioimmunoassay procedure and accordingly increases its reproducibility. A few examples of vindesine level measurements in human plasma collected after bolus intravenous injection and during long-term infusion are given.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Mitomycin C plus vindesine plus etoposide (MEV) versus mitomycin C plus vindesine plus cisplatin (MVP) in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer: A phase III multicentre randomised trial. The "Gruppo Oncologico Centro-Sud-Isole' (G.O.C.S.I.).

PURPOSE: To compare mitomycin C plus vindesine plus etoposide (MEV) vs. mitomycin C plus vindesine plus cisplatin (MVP) in the treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 204 patients were entered in a phase III multicentre randomised trial from June 1990 to December 1994 and stratified according to the ECOG performance status (0-1 vs. 2). MVP was given in the following dosages: mitomycin C 8 mg/m2+vindesine 3 mg/m2+cisplatin 100 mg/m2 i.v. day 1 and vindesine 3 mg/m2 i.v. day 8 with cycles repeated every 4 weeks. MEV was given in the following dosages: mitomycin C 8 mg/m2+vindesine 3 mg/ m2 i.v. day 1 and etoposide 100 mg/m2 i.v. days 1 to 3 with cycles repeated every 3 weeks. For both treatments a maximum of 6 cycles was planned. Response and toxicity were evaluated according to WHO. Subjective responses were assessed by numerical scales. Analyses were made on the basis of intent to treat. RESULTS: The objective response rate was 21.4% (1 CR + 21 PR among 103 patients) in the MEV and 28.7% (1 CR + 28 PR among 101 patients) in the MVP arm (P = 0.48). Symptoms were similar in the two arms. 196 patients progressed and 182 died. The median times to progression were 10 weeks (95% CI 9-12) and 12 weeks (95% CI 10-15) and median survivals were 29 weeks (95% CI 25-36) and 28 weeks (95% CI 25-35) in the MEV and MVP arms, respectively. The relative risks of progressing and of dying were 0.89 (95% CL 0.66-1.20) and 0.96 (95% CL 0.71-1.30), respectively, for patients receiving MVP as compared with those receiving MEV at multivariate analysis adjusted by sex, age, histologic type, number of metastatic sites, performance status at entry, and centre. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, no significant differences were observed in response rate, survival or palliation of symptoms between the MEV and MVP regimens, while toxicity was significantly more frequent and severe with MVP. Thus, MEV should be considered a reasonable alternative to the MVP regimen in the treatment of stage IV NSCLC.

Adult↗
PubMed1994

A randomised trial of vindesine plus interferon-alpha 2b compared with interferon-alpha 2b or vindesine alone in the treatment of advanced malignant melanoma.

60 patients were entered into a randomised study comparing vindesine (3 mg/m2/week) plus interferon-alpha 2b (6 U/m2 3 times per week) to vindesine alone or to interferon alone for the treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma. Patients receiving the combination therapy arm (schedule A; vindesine plus interferon-alpha 2b) showed a complete and partial response rate of 8/20 (40%) which was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than that achieved with either single-agent treatment schedule. In addition, patients receiving the combined treatment schedule had a significantly prolonged survival (median 19 months) when compared to a median of 10 months for interferon alone and 5 months for vindesine alone. The combination was generally well tolerated with only additive toxicity. It is concluded that combination treatment regimens utilising interferons together with chemotherapeutic agents deserve further study in the treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma.

Combined Modality Therapy↗
PubMed1987

A randomized trial comparing vindesine and cisplatinum to vindesine and methotrexate in advanced non small cell lung carcinoma.

Combination chemotherapy using vindesine and cisplatinum has been reported to be active in non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). In an attempt to reduce the potential neurotoxicity of this combination, and to assess the role of cisplatinum, a randomized trial has compared vindesine and cisplatinum to vindesine and methotrexate in 48 patients with advanced symptomatic NSCLC. Patient characteristics were similar in the two treatment arms. Objective tumour response and survival were similar for both treatments. No complete response occurred. Four patients receiving vindesine/cisplatinum (16%) and three patients receiving vindesine/methotrexate (13%) had a partial response. All responses occurred in patients with a performance status of 70% or more and no response was seen in patients with squamous cell carcinoma. Median survival for both regimens was 16 weeks. Toxicity was considerable and only six patients (12.5%) felt better on treatment. Nausea and vomiting were more frequent in the vindesine/cisplatinum arm, but mild neurotoxicity was more common in the vindesine/methotrexate arm. The low response rates, short survival and significant toxicity suggest that the role of combination chemotherapy in NSCLC remains to be established.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed1991

A randomised clinical trial of vindesine plus cisplatin versus mitomycin plus vindesine and cisplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

This trial was carried out to evaluate the therapeutic benefit of the addition of mitomycin to vindesine plus cisplatin (80 mg/m2) 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% (14/62) vs. 35% (21/60) (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.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Randomised phase II study of epirubicin-vindesine versus mitoxantrone-vindesine in metastatic breast cancer.

The purpose of this study was to compare the activity and toxicity of epirubicin-vindesine (EV) with mitoxantrone-vindesine (MV) in patients with metastatic breast cancer. A total of 295 patients was randomly allocated to treatment with vindesine 3 mg/m2 combined with either epirubicin 40 mg/m2 or mitoxantrone 10 mg/m2. All drugs were given by intravenous push, treatment cycles were repeated at 3-4 week intervals. 255 patients were available for response, and 283 for toxicity. EV and MV yielded similar objective response rates (34 and 26%, respectively), response durations, times to progression and survival. Median time to remission was 1.8 and 3.1 months (P = 0.006) with EV and MV, respectively. In patients with visceral metastases, response rate was higher with EV than MV (40 versus 23%; P = 0.03). Patients receiving MV had less nausea/vomiting (P = 0.007) and alopecia (P = < 0.001) of WHO grade > or = 2. Bone marrow, cardiac and other toxicities were mild with both treatments. The observed differences in activity and toxicity between the two regimens appear to have clinical relevance. EV proved to be more active in visceral disease and to be able to induce remissions more rapidly. Accordingly, patients with visceral metastases or severe tumour-related symptoms may benefit from epirubicin-based treatment. Subjective toxicities, i.e. nausea/vomiting and alopecia, were less frequent and severe with MV. Thus, MV may prove useful in patients with more indolent disease and appears to warrant phase III evaluation in such patients.

Adult↗
PubMed1985

Prospective randomized trial in advanced malignant melanoma with cis-platinum, vindesine, and etoposide vs. cis-platinum, vindesine, and lomustine.

Thirty-seven consecutive patients with disseminated malignant melanoma and previously untreated with chemotherapy were randomly allocated to receive vindesine, cis-platinum, and etoposide (Regimen A) or vindesine, cis-platinum, and lomustine (Regimen B). In 31 evaluable patients, Regimen A induced an overall response rate of 31% and a complete response rate of 6%; with Regimen B the corresponding findings were 20% and 20%, respectively. The median duration of complete response was 12 months with both regimens and the comparative median total survivals were 8 and 6 months, respectively. In no case was toxicity so severe to require treatment discontinuation, and the major dose-limiting side effect was myelosuppression, especially in the patients treated with Regimen B. Present results confirm once more the limited activity of drugs and regimens presently utilized in the treatment of advanced malignant melanoma.

Adult↗
PubMed1982

Cross-resistance of cultured murine leukemia vincristine-resistant P388 cells to vinblastine, vindesine, and bis (N-ethylidene vindesine) disulfide, disulfate.

Cultured P388 leukemia cells derived from vincristine (VCR)-resistant cell populations developed in vivo in (C57BL X DBA/2)F1 mice (P388/VCR) were cross-resistant to vinblastine (VLB), vindesine (VDS), and bis(N-ethylidene vindesine)disulfide, disulfate (bis-VDS). Cross-resistance was a function of concentration and time of exposure. Cultured P388/VCR cells were more sensitive to 6.1x10-5Mbis- VDS than to 6.1x10-5MVDS or to 6.1x10-5MVLB. Cultured P388 cells derived from VCR-sensitive P388 leukemia passaged in vivo (P388/0)were significantly more sensitive to VDS and bis-VDS than to VLB. This degree of difference in sensitivity was also a function of concentration and time of exposure.

Animals↗
PubMedDate not supplied

A prospective randomized trial of combination vindesine and cisplatin versus single-agent vindesine in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Antineoplastic agents, used alone or in combination, are capable of achieving objective remissions in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer. Response rates have been modest, however, and responses are generally not durable. Furthermore, the toxicity of some regimens has been substantial, creating a narrow therapeutic ratio and a questionable impact on survival. The addition of cisplatin (DDP) to cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin (Adriamycin) resulted in major response rates that were superior to those obtained with cyclophosphamide or doxorubicin used alone or in combination. Vindesine (DVA) was evaluated in several phase II trials that demonstrated reproducible limited antitumor activity in nonsmall cell lung cancer. Gralla et al combined DVA with DDP in regimens of varying DDP dosage and noted a response rate of about 43%.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed1984

Methotrexate-vindesine association in the treatment of head and neck cancer influence of vindesine on methotrexate's pharmacokinetic behavior.

Determination of methotrexate (MTX) kinetics after an IV bolus (50 mg/m2) allows prediction of the steady-state plasma level of this drug during a constant infusion. This prediction allows high-dose MTX (HD-MTX) therapy without major toxicity. Patients with head and neck carcinoma received HD-MTX and vindesine (VDS) infusions concomitantly. The therapeutic survey of these patients showed that the predicted plasma level of MTX was not achieved in the presence of VDS. Moreover, the computed dose of MTX had to be increased by a larger amount if the MTX plasma clearance after the identification IV push was low (less than 9 l/h). In the presence of VDS, the creatinine clearance is lower than when MTX is infused alone, and MTX renal elimination is identical (MTX or MTX + VDS infusions). Thus it seems that the decrease of the MTX plasma level during MTX-VDS infusion could be due to an increase of cellular incorporation.

Adult↗
PubMed1986

Methotrexate-vindesine association in head and neck cancer: modification of methotrexate's hydroxylation in presence of vindesine.

High-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) infusions associated with vindesine (VDS) have been used in the treatment of head and neck cancer. In a previous study, VDS was shown to increase the apparent plasma clearance of MTX. We have studied the MTX hydroxylation process in the presence of VDS. Different routes of administration have been tested (IV pushes and 24-h or 36-h infusions). A radioimmunoassay has been developed to measure 7-OH-MTX. The defined protocols enabled us to show that VDS influences not only the pharmacokinetic behavior of methotrexate but also its hydroxylation, which is decreased in presence of VDS.

Adult↗
PubMed1983

Therapeutic efficacy and pharmacokinetics of vindesine and vindesine-cisplatin in previously treated patients with non-small cell lung carcinoma.

Twenty-nine patients with non-small cell lung cancer refractory to prior therapy were treated with either vindesine (VDS) alone (3 mg/m2 every week) or the combination of VDS plus cisplatin (DDP) (100 mg/m2 every 28 days). Serial blood and urine samples were collected to assess the pharmacokinetics of VDS and DDP. All patients were evaluable for toxicity and 27 were evaluable for response. No objective antitumor responses were observed. Peripheral neuropathy manifested by paresthesias, muscle weakness, and constipation were observed in 20 treated patients, and hematologic toxicity consisting of thrombocytopenia and/or leukopenia occurred in 18 patients. The plasma and urinary pharmacokinetics of VDS and DDP measured in this study indicate that VDS and DDP do not interfere with each other and that the pharmacokinetics in previously treated and untreated patients are similar. The antitumor responses and degree of toxicity observed in this trial compare unfavorably with previously reported VDS and VDS-DDP trials in previously untreated patients with this disease and suggest that prior exposure to chemotherapy might both decrease antitumor activity and enhance toxicity of these chemotherapeutic agents.

Aged↗