Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Vinorelbine

A Review of its Pharmacological Properties and Clinical Use in Cancer Chemotherapy

  • Drug Evaluation
  • Published:
Drugs & Aging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 01 August 1995

Summary

Synopsis

Vinorelbine is a semisynthetic vinca alkaloid with a broad spectrum of antitumour activity. The drug is effective as a single agent in inoperable/advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), producing objective response rates of about 15 to 30%, and as first-line or later chemotherapy for metastatic spread in advanced breast cancer. Combining vinorelbine with standard chemotherapeutic regimens improves response rates in these indications compared with vinorelbine monotherapy: in NSCLC response rates increase to 30 to 50% when vinorelbine is administered with cisplatin. Importantly, survival was prolonged by a further 9 weeks with this combination in a trial in >600 patients with NSCLC.

Comparative trials evaluating vinorelbine in women with advanced breast cancer are few at present. However, results suggest greater efficacy for vinorelbine than for melphalan as second-line chemotherapy, and similar efficacy for vinorelbine plus doxorubicin compared with doxorubicin plus 2 other drugs as first-line chemotherapy.

Vinorelbine has tended to yield superior response rates when compared with vindesine, and appears to have greater haematological toxicity (i.e. granulocytopenia) but less neurological toxicity (peripheral neuropathy, constipation, loss of deep tendon reflexes) than this agent. Myelosuppression is the most frequent cause of vinorelbine treatment delay or dose reduction. Other consequences of vinorelbine therapy are those typically seen with antineoplastic agents, such as diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting, and alopecia. However, these are rarely severe.

Early clinical investigations indicate that the antitumour effects of vinorelbine in other malignancies including ovarian carcinoma, lymphoma and head and neck cancer warrant further exploration, as does the efficacy of the drug relative to standard approaches and its possible beneficial effects on quality of life of cancer patients. Clarification is also required of the feasibility of an oral dosage form, which in preliminary investigations has shown some efficacy in NSCLC, but a variable response rate and high incidence of gastrointestinal disturbances in women with breast cancer.

Thus, vinorelbine as a single agent or combined palliative therapy is effective against advanced NSCLC, and as first-or second-line chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. This semisynthetic vinca alkaloid has a manageable tolerability profile and potential for use in other malignancies and as an oral formulation. With these attributes, vinorelbine is a valuable option which extends the range of treatments available for these difficult-to-treat malignancies.

Pharmacodynamic Properties

Vinorelbine is a semisynthetic vinca alkaloid with cytostatic activity against a broad range of tumour cell lines. It appears more active than vinblastine, vindesine and vincristine against non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), as active as vinblastine against ovarian carcinoma, and less active than vinblastine and vincristine against leukaemia in vitro. Vinorebine has generally also shown similar effects to vindesine in in vivo models of NSCLC. Against breast cancer tumours, vinorelbine appeared less active than vinblastine but at least as active as vindesine and vincristine in vivo. Cross-resistance between vinorelbine and other vinca alkaloids is predicted to be low, based on in vitro and in vivo findings.

Like other vinca alkaloids, vinorelbine is a mitotic inhibitor (‘spindle poison’) believed to exert its antitumour effects by binding to tubulin, thus inhibiting microtubule assembly and eventually preventing metaphasic tumour cell division. Its lesser activity than other vinca alkaloids against axonal microtubules is proposed to account for its reduced tendency to cause neurotoxicity compared with some other members of its class, although a direct relationship has not been proven as yet.

Pharmacokinetic Properties

Following intravenous administration, vinorelbine is widely distributed to body tissues, particularly to excretory organs and lung: it is present in healthy lung tissue in concentrations up to 30-fold higher than those in plasma. Vinorelbine crosses the placenta in rats, binds to erythrocytes and is 70 to 80% bound to human plasma proteins. The activity of deacetylvinorelbine, the only metabolite detected in humans, is unknown. Both vinorelbine and this metabolite are taken up by the liver and excreted mainly in bile. The elimination half-life (t½β) of about 40 to 45 hours calculated for vinorelbine is intermediate between values reported for vindesine and vinblastine (20 to 25 hours), and for vincristine (85 hours).

Bioavailability of oral vinorelbine formulations has been determined to be 24 or 40%, depending on the formulation tested. Although disposition of vinorelbine after oral administration is less well studied, values of pharmacokinetic parameters (systemic clearance, volume of distribution, t½β) generally approximate those for intravenously injected drug.

Clinical Use

The largest body of evidence with vinorelbine has been obtained in patients with NSCLC and advanced breast cancer, who tend to be older. Vinorelbine shows efficacy as a single agent in advanced breast cancer and inoperable/advanced NSCLC comparable to that reported in the literature for standard chemotherapeutic options. Objective response rates are in the range of 30 to 50% for chemotherapy-naive women with advanced breast cancer (first-line chemotherapy) and about 15 to 30% in those receiving the drug as second-line or later chemotherapy. Median response duration was 21 to 39 weeks, and 14 to 34 weeks, respectively, for these patient groups.

Combining vinorelbine with other agents (e.g. doxorubicin, epirubicin, fluorouracil, mitomycin or mitoxantrone) increases response rates to 55 to 75% as first-line and 30 to 50% as second-line chemotherapy in women with breast cancer. The few comparative trials available suggest better efficacy for vinorelbine (notably 4 weeks longer survival) than for melphalan as single agent second-line chemotherapy, and similar efficacy for vinorelbine plus doxorubicin to that for doxorubicin plus fluorouracil and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy.

In previously untreated patients with primarily stages III and IV NSCLC, response rates are approximately 15 to 30% for vinorelbine as a single agent and approximately 30 to 50% when combined with cisplatin. Survival duration with vinorelbine as a single agent has ranged from 25 to 33 weeks. While 1 group of investigators found no survival differences between vinorelbine alone and vinorelbine plus cisplatin, a survival advantage of 9 weeks for combined therapy was demonstrated in a large trial in >600 patients, which used a larger dosage of cisplatin. In addition, patients survived a median of 8 weeks longer with vinorelbine plus cisplatin than with vindesine plus cisplatin.

Indeed, vinorelbine with or without other agents has tended to yield a superior response rate to that seen with vindesine in similar regimens, in most directly comparative trials. As single agent chemotherapy, vinorelbine was as effective as vindesine plus cisplatin (14 vs 19% response) and produced a greater median survival duration (30 vs 22 weeks) than fluorouracil plus calcium folinate (folinic acid; leucovorin calcium). Generally, response rates similar to those found with vinorelbine plus cisplatin have been demonstrated for multidrug regimens incorporating vinorelbine and cisplatin plus fluorouracil and etoposide, or with vinorelbine plus ifosfamide/mesna or carboplatin, in noncomparative trials.

Improved quality of life was reported in 47% and relief of symptoms in 65% of women with advanced breast cancer receiving vinorelbine in 2 studies; vinorelbine resembled melphalan for relief of symptoms. Quality-of-life assessment favoured vinorelbine over fluorouracil plus calcium folinate for symptom distress, but not for other measures, in patients with NSCLC. Although these results suggest a positive effect of vinorelbine on quality of life, reporting methods have been inadequate to assess their value.

Other indications in which intravenous vinorelbine has shown promise include advanced ovarian carcinoma, lymphoma and head and neck cancer. Use of oral formulations has also been investigated. Preliminary reports imply oral vinorelbine has variable activity in advanced breast cancer, but a response rate and median duration of survival at the lower end of the range obtained with intravenous formulations were recorded among 95 patients with NSCLC.

Tolerability

Myelosuppression is the major dose-limiting toxicity of vinorelbine. Granulocytopenia, occurring in >80% of individuals and rated as moderate to severe in 30 to 40%, may necessitate hospitalisation for related fever/sepsis in 9% of patients. Granulocyte counts reach nadirs within 2 weeks of an initial dose during weekly administration and recover over a similar period. Supportive treatment with recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) may aid dose intensification of vinorelbine-containing regimens by limiting neutropenia.

Neurotoxicity typical of vinca alkaloids as a class is another important feature of the tolerability profile of vinorelbine. Peripheral neuropathy develops in 20 to 30% of patients, constipation in 35% and loss of deep tendon reflexes in 5%. These effects are severe in <2% of patients. Vinorelbine appears to cause greater haematological toxicity but less neurotoxicity than vindesine, as shown in comparative clinical trials. A brief report of a cost analysis found vinorelbine to achieve modest savings of about 6% compared with vindesine, attributable largely to the decreased cost of treating adverse effects.

In addition, vinorelbine therapy is associated with mild to moderate nausea/vomiting (40% of patients), diarrhoea, anorexia and stomatitis (each <20%), and mild, reversible alopecia (12%) — consequences typical of virtually all chemotherapeutic regimens. Other events documented during vinorelbine therapy include chest pain in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease or chest tumours (7%), injection site reactions (30%) and, rarely, allergic-type acute pulmonary reactions. The tolerability profile of oral vinorelbine formulations tested to date appears similar to that seen after intravenous use, with the exception of a higher incidence of gastrointestinal intolerance, notably diarrhoea, with oral use (>50% of patients).

Dosage and Administration

Vinorelbine is usually initiated at a dose of 30 mg/m2 by weekly intravenous push or infusion over 6 to 10 minutes. Dose reduction is necessary in patients with compromised granulocyte counts (see table X), and in those with hepatic dysfunction. In some countries vinorelbine is contraindicated in patients with granulocyte counts <1 × 109/L (1000 cells/mm3). Guidelines are not available for oral preparations undergoing investigation: dosages used in clinical trials have ranged from 40 to 130 mg/m2/week.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Balducci L. Perspectives on quality of life of older patients with cancer. Drugs Aging 1994; 4: 313–24

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Balducci L, Mowrey K. Pharmacology and organ toxicity of chemotherapy in older patients. Oncology 1992; 6 Suppl. 2: 62–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Potier P. The synthesis of Navelbine® — prototype of a new series of vinblastine derivatives. Semin Oncol 1989; 16Supp. 4: 2–4

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cros S, Wright M, Morimoto M, et al. Experimental antitumor activity of Navelbine®. Semin Oncol 1989; 16 Suppl. 4: 15–20

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Etiévant C, Kruczynski A, Pauwels O, et al. The combination of the tetrazolium derivative reduction (MTT) and digital cell image analysis to monitor in vitro the cytotoxicity of antineoplastic drugs. Anticancer Res 1991; 11: 305–12

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gomi K, Ohno H, Nomura K, et al. Kinetic analysis of combination effect of navelbine (KW-2307) with cisplatin against human lung adenocarcinoma PC-12 cells in culture. Jpn J Cancer Res 1992; 83: 532–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Photiou A, Sheikh MN, Bafaloukos D, et al. Antiproliferative activity of vinorelbine (Navelbine) against six human melanoma cell lines. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 1992; 118: 249–54

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Adams DJ. Synergy of Navelbine-Taxol combination treatment in two human breast cancer cell lines [abstract no. 1944]. Proceedings of the AACR 1994; 35: 327

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ashizawa T, Miyoshi K, Asada M, et al. Antitumour activity of Navelbine (vinorelbine ditartrate), a new vinca alkaloid analog [in Japanese]. Jpn J Cancer Chemother 1993; 20: 59–66

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Roussakis C, Pouchus YF, Gratas C, et al. In vivo study of vinorelbine associations with cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil or actinomycin D relative to a non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLCN6-L16). Anticancer Drug Des 1993; 8: 165–71

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Maral R, Bourut C, Chenu E, et al. Experimental antitumour activity of 5′-noranydrovinblastine navelbine. Cancer Lett 1984; 22: 49–55

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Otter GM, Sirotnak FM. Effective combination therapy of metastatic murine solid tumors with edatrexate and the vinca alkaloids, vinblastine, navelbine and vindesine. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1994; 33: 286–90

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Van den Berge D, Bruyneel E, Distelmans W, et al. 5′-Noranhydrovinblastine (Navelbine®) has an anti-invasive effect on MO4 mouse fibrosarcoma cells in vitro and in vivo. Anticancer Res 1993; 13: 273–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Knick VC, Eberwein DJ, Miller CG. Preclinical activity of Navelbine® and Taxol drug combinations [abstract no. 1945]. Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research 1994; 35: 327

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kaye SB. Reversal of multidrug resistance. Cancer Treat Rev 1990; 17 Suppl. A: 37–43

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Zhou XJ, Rahmani R. Preclinical and clinical pharmacology of vinca alkaloids. Drugs 1992; 44 Suppl. 4: 1–16

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ford JM, Hait WN. Pharmacology of drugs that alter multidrug resistance in cancer. Pharmacol Rev 1990; 42: 155–99

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Booser DJ, Hortobagyi GN. Anthracycline antibiotics in cancer chemotherapy: focus on drug resistance. Drugs 1994; 47: 223–58

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. McClean S, Whelan RDH, Hosking LK, et al. Expression of drug resistance in Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells following X-ray pre-treatment in vitro. Biochem Soc Trans 1991; 19: 278S

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Maral R, Bourut C, Chenu E, et al. Experimental in vivo cross-resistance of vinca alkaloid drugs. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1981; 5: 197–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Mathé G, Misset JL, De Vassal F, et al. Phase II clinical trial with vindesine for remission induction in acute leukemia, blastic crisis of chronic myeloid leukemia, lymphosarcoma, and Hodgkin’s disease: absence of cross-resistance with vincristine. Cancer Treat Reports 1978; 62: 805–9

    Google Scholar 

  22. Meininger V, Binet S, Chaineau E, et al. In situ response to vinca alkaloids by microtubules in cultured post-implanted mouse embryos. Biol Cell 1990; 68: 21–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Paintrand M-R, Pignot I. Navelbine: an ultrastructure study of its effects. J Electron Microsc 1983; 32: 115–24

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Binet S, Chaineau E, Fellous A, et al. Immunofluorescence study of the action of navelbine, vincristine and vinblastine on mitotic and axonal microtubules. Int J Cancer 1990; 46: 262–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Fellous A, Ohayon R, Vacassin T, et al. Biochemical effects of Navelbine® on tubulin and associated proteins. Semin Oncol 1989; 16 Suppl. 4: 9–14

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Rahmani R, Martin M, Barbet J, et al. Radioimmunoassay and preliminary pharmacokinetic studies in rats of 5′-nor-anhydrovinblastine (Navelbine). Cancer Res 1984; 44: 5609–13

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Debal V, Morjani H, Millot J-M, et al. Determination of vinorelbine (Navelbine) in tumour cells by high-performance liquid chromatography. J Chromatogr Biomed Appl 1992; 581: 93–9

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Van Tellingen O, Kuijpers A, Beijnen JH, et al. Bio-analysis of vinorelbine by high-performance chromatography with fluorescence detection. J Chromatogr 1992; 573: 328–32

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Jehl F, Debs J, Herline C, et al. Determination of Navelbine and desacetylnavelbine in biological fluids by high-performance liquid chromatography. J Chromatogr 1990; 525: 225–33

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Van Belle S, De Smet M, Monsaert C, et al. High-performance liquid Chromatographic determination of navelbine in MO4 mouse fibrosarcoma cells and biological fluids. J Chromatogr 1992; 576: 351–7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Nicot G, Lachatre G, Marquet P, et al. High-performance liquid Chromatographic determination of Navelbine in human plasma and urine. J Chromatogr 1990; 528: 258–66

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Marquet P, Lachatre G, Debord J, et al. Pharmacokinetics of vinorelbine in man. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1992; 42: 545–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhou XJ, Boré P, Monjanel S, et al. Pharmacokinetics of navelbine after oral administration in cancer patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1991; 29: 66–70

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Jehl F, Quoix E, Leveque D, et al. Pharmacokinetic and preliminary metabolic fate of navelbine in humans as determined by high performance liquid chromatography. Cancer Res 1991; 51: 2073–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Rahmani R, Guéritte F, Martin M, et al. Comparative pharmacokinetics of antitumor vinca alkaloids: intravenous bolus injections of navelbine and related alkaloids to cancer patients and rats. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1986; 16: 223–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Rahmani R, Bruno R, Iliadis A, et al. Clinical pharmacokinetics of the antitumour drug navelbine (5′-noranhydrovinblastine). Cancer Res 1987; 47: 5796–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Kobayashi S, Sakai T, Dalrymple PD, et al. Disposition of the novel anticancer agent vinorelbine ditartrate following intravenous administration in mice, rats and dogs. Arzneimittel-Forschung 1993; 43: 1367–77

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Van Tellingen O, Kuijpers A, Beijnen JH, et al. Plasma pharmacokinetics, tissue disposition, excretion and metabolism of vinorelbine in mice as determined by high performance liquid chromatography. Invest New Drugs 1993; 11: 141–50

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Krikorian A, Rahmani R, Bromet M, et al. Pharmacokinetics and metabolism of Navelbine®. Sem Oncol 1989; 2 Suppl. 4: 21–5

    Google Scholar 

  40. Levêque D, Quoix E, Dumont P, et al. Pulmonary distribution of vinorelbine in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1993; 33: 176–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Boré P, Rahmani R, van Cantfort J, et al. Pharmacokinetics of a new anticancer drug, navelbine, in patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1989; 23: 247–51

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Sahnoun Z, Zhou XJ, Boré P, et al. Pharmacocinétique clinique de navelbine après administration orale, métabolisme in vitro et variabilité interindividuelle. Bull Cancer 1990; 77: 1115–21

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Rahmani R, Boré P, Favre C, et al. Preliminary studies on vindesine (VDS) and navelbine (NVB) metabolism using both human isolated hepatocytes and microsomal fractions [abstract]. Proceedings of the 5th NCI/EORTC Symposium on New Drugs in Cancer Chemotherapy; 1986 October 22–24; Amsterdam

  44. Van Cantfort J, Cano JP, Focan C, et al. Systemic bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of orally administered navelbine (NVB): pilot study [abstract no. 447]. Invest New Drugs 1989; 7: 460

    Google Scholar 

  45. Lucas S, Donehower R, Rowinsky E, et al. Weekly Navelbine (NVB) liquid-filled soft gelatin capsules at full therapeutic doses in patients (pts) with solid tumors [abstract no. 264]. Ann Oncol 1992; 3 Suppl. 1: 125

    Google Scholar 

  46. Rajaonarison JF, Lacarelle B, Catalin J, et al. Effect of anticancer drugs on the glucuronidation of 3′-azido-3′-deoxy-thymidine in human liver microsomes. Drug Metab Dispos 1993; 21: 823–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Levêque D, Jehl F, Quoix E, et al. Clinical pharmacokinetics of vinorelbine alone and combined with cisplatin. J Clin Pharmacol 1992; 32: 1096–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Yamamoto M, Ariyoshi Y, Hasegawa K, et al. Phase-I clinical study of KW-2307 combined with cisplatin in non-small cell lung cancer patients [In Japanese]. Jpn J Cancer Chemother 1994; 21: 993–9

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Kelsey JL, Gammon MD. The epidemiology of breast cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 1991; 41: 146–65

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Bryson HM, Plosker GL. Tamoxifen: a review of pharmacoeconomic and quality of life considerations for its use as adjuvant therapy in women with breast cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 1993; 4: 40–66

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Delgado FM, Canobbio L, Boccardo F, et al. Phase II pilot study of Navelbine® in advanced breast cancer. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine® (vinorelbine). Update and new trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 199–216

    Google Scholar 

  52. Silliman RA, Balducci L, Goodwin JS, et al. Breast cancer care in old age: what we know, don’t know, and do. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85: 190–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Falkson CI, Falkson G, Falkson HC. Postmenopausal breast cancer. Drug therapy in the 1990s. Drugs Aging 1993; 3: 106–21

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Mouridsen HT. Systemic therapy of advanced breast cancer. Drugs 1992; 44 Suppl. 4: 17–28

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Marty M, Extra JM, Dieras V, et al. A review of the antitumour activity of vinorelbine in breast cancer. Drugs 1992; 44 Suppl.4: 29–35

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Ambrosini G, Caffo O, Barni S, et al. Phase II trial on vinorelbine (VNB) in pre-treated metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients: an Italian multicentric study [abstract no. 98]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 74

    Google Scholar 

  57. Canobbio L, Boccardo F, Pastorino G, et al. Phase-II study of Navelbine® in advanced breast cancer. Semin Oncol 1989; 16 Suppl. 4: 33–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Fumoleau P, Delgado FM, Delozier T, et al. Phase II trial of weekly intravenous vinorelbine in first-line advanced breast cancer chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 1245–52

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Izzo J, Toussaint C, Chabot G, et al. High activity and dose intensity (DI) relationship in advanced breast cancer (ABC) with continuous infusion (CIV) of Navelbine (NVB) [abstract no. 110]. Proceedings of ASCO 1992; 11: 71

    Google Scholar 

  60. Lluch A, Garcia Conde J, Casado A, et al. Phase II trial with Navelbine (NVB) in advanced breast cancer (ABC) previously untreated [abstract no. 115]. Proceedings of ASCO 1992; 11: 72

    Google Scholar 

  61. Mickiewicz E, Fernandez O, Bruno S, et al. Phase II trial of Navelbine (NVB) in advanced breast cancer (ABC) [abstract no. 368]. Eur J Cancer 1991; 27 Suppl. 2: S66

    Google Scholar 

  62. Romero A, Rabinovich MG, Vallejo CT, et al. Vinorelbine as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 336–41

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Weber B, Vogel C, Jones S, et al. A US multicenter phase II trial of Navelbine in advanced breast cancer [abstract no. 46]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 61

    Google Scholar 

  64. Cvitkovic E, Izzo J. The current and future place of vinorelbine in cancer therapy. Drugs 1992; 44 Suppl. 4: 36–45

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Anonymous. Navelbine injection. Product information. Burroughs Wellcome Co. data on file. March 30, 1994

  66. Coppola F, Balbiani L, Blajman C, et al. Vinorelbine (VNB) containing regimens in three different schedules for the treatment of advanced breast cancer (ABC) [abstract no. 144]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 85

    Google Scholar 

  67. Hochster H, Vogel C, Blumenreich N, et al. A multicenter phase II study of Navelbine (NVB) and doxorubicin (DOX) as first line chemotherapy of metastatic breast cancer [abstract no. 203]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 100

    Google Scholar 

  68. Spielmann M, Dorval T, Turpin F, et al. Phase II study with Navelbine (NVB) + adriamycin (ADR) combination in advanced breast cancer (ABC) [abstract no. 139]. Proceedings of ASCO 1991; 10: 66

    Google Scholar 

  69. Gindrey-Vie B, Genot J-Y, Switsers O, et al. Combination chemotherapy with Navelbine, epirubicin and mitomycin C: a pilot study in advanced breast cancer (ABC) [abstract]. Eur J Cancer 1991; 27 Suppl 2: S61

    Google Scholar 

  70. Dieras V, Pierga J-Y, Extra JM, et al. Results of a combination of Navelbine (NVB) and fluoro-uracil (FU) in advanced breast cancer (ABC) and with a group sequential design (GSD) [abstract no. 178]. Ann Oncol 1992; 3 Suppl. 5: 46

    Google Scholar 

  71. Ferrero JM, Wendling JL, Hoch M, et al. Mitoxantrone (MTZ)-vinorelbine (VNR) as first line chemotherapy (CT) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC): a pilot study [abstract no. 234]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 108

    Google Scholar 

  72. Blajman C, Balbiani L, Block J, et al. Navelbine (N) plus adriamycin (A) vs FAC in advanced breast cancer [abstract]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 92

    Google Scholar 

  73. Van Praagh J, Martineau N, Curé H, et al. Efficacy of a chemotherapy regimen combining vinorelbine, epirubicine and methotrexate (VEM) in locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer [abstract no. 180]. Procedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 95

    Google Scholar 

  74. Kayitalire L, Spielmann N, Brain E, et al. Salvage chemotherapy (CT) with combination of mitoxantrone (MTZ) and vinorelbine (VRB) in resistant to anthracyclines advanced breast cancer (ABC) [abstract no. 161]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 90

    Google Scholar 

  75. Jones S, Winer E, Vogel C, et al. A multicenter, randomized trial of IV Navelbine® vs IV Alkeran® in patients with anthracycline-refractory advanced breast cancer (ABC) [abstract no 216]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 103

    Google Scholar 

  76. Extra JM, Leandri S, Dieras V, et al. Phase II study of vinorelbine in first and second line treatment of advanced breast cancer. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine (vinorelbine). Update and New Trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 213–20

    Google Scholar 

  77. Tominaga T, Nomura Y, Adachi I, et al. Late phase II study of KW-2307 in advanced or recurrent breast cancer [In Japanese]. Jpn J Cancer Chemother 1994; 21: 809–16

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Tresca P, Fumoleau P, Roche H, et al. Vinorelbine, a new active drug in breast carcinoma: results of an ARTAC phase II trial [abstract no. 66]. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1990; 16: 191

    Google Scholar 

  79. Agostara B, Gebbia V, Testa A, et al. Mitomycin C and vinorelbine as second line chemotherapy for metastatic breast carcinoma. Tumori 1994; 80: 33–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Galvez CA, Botto HG, Botto I, et al. Chemotherapy with mitoxantrone, ifosfamide and navelbine as third line chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer [abstract no. 327]. Ann Oncol 1992; 3 Suppl. 5: 84

    Google Scholar 

  81. Scheithauer W, Kornek G, Haider K, et al. Effective second line chemotherapy of advanced breast cancer with navelbine and mitomycin C. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1993; 26: 49–53

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Chadjaa M, Izzo J, May-Levin F, et al. Preliminary data on 4′epiadriamycine (EPI)-vinorelbine (VNB): a new active combination in advanced breast cancer [abstract no. 152]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 88

    Google Scholar 

  83. Froudarakis M, Catimel G, Guastalla JP, et al. Phase II study of Navelbine (NVB) and 5-fluorouracil (5FU) as second line chemotherapy in metastatic breast carcinoma (MBC) [abstract]. Ann Oncol 1992; 3 Suppl. 5: 88

    Google Scholar 

  84. Queisser W, Doss A, Wander HE, et al. Phase II study of vinorelbine by oral route (in a hard gelatine capsule) for metastatic breast cancer patients. Onkologie 1991; 14: 35–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Spicer D, McCaskill-Stevens W, Oken M, et al. Oral Navelbine® (NVB) in women with previously treated advanced breast cancer (ABC): a US multicenter phase II trial [abstract]. Presented at the ASCO Annual Meeting; 1994 May 14–17; Dallas

  86. Tannock IF, Boyd NF, DeBoer G, et al. A randomised trial of two dose levels of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil chemotherapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1988; 6: 1377–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Dautzenberg B. Epidemiology and prognosis of non small cell lung cancer. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine® (vinorelbine). Update and new trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 61–8

    Google Scholar 

  88. Faulds D. Current options in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Drugs 1992; 44 Suppl. 4: 46–59

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Wollner D. Newer agents for the elderly with advanced cancer. P&T 1992; Nov: 1697–708

  90. Mountain CF. A new international staging system for lung cancer. Chest 1986; 89 Suppl: 225S–33S

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Balbiani L, Coppola F, Blajman C, et al. Vinorelbine (V): Phase II study in non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a multi-institutional study [abstract]. Presented at the 16th International Cancer Congress; 1994 Oct 30–Nov 5; New Delhi

  92. Depierre A, Chastang C, Quoix E, et al. Vinorelbine versus vinorelbine plus cisplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a randomized trial. Ann Oncol 1994; 5: 42–7

    Google Scholar 

  93. Le Chevalier T, Brisgand D, Douillard J-Y, et al. Randomized study of vinorelbine and cisplatin versus vindesine and cisplatin versus vinorelbine alone in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results of a European Multicenter Trial including 612 patients. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 360–7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Crivellari D, Veronesi A, Sacco C, et al. Phase II study of vinorelbine (V) in 50 patients (pts) with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract no. 1192]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 355

    Google Scholar 

  95. Depierre A, Lemarie E, Dabouis G, et al. A phase II study of navelbine (vinorelbine) in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. Am J Clin Oncol (CCT) 1991; 14: 115–9

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Yokoyama A, Furuse K, Niitani H, et al. Multi-institutional phase II study of Navelbine (vinorelbine) in non-small cell lung cancer [abstract no. 956]. Proceedings of ASCO 1992; 11: 287

    Google Scholar 

  97. Balbiani L, Coppola F, Blajman C, et al. 1185]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 352

    Google Scholar 

  98. Malzyner A, Bruno S, Piris N, et al. Randomized phase II trial of navelbine (NVB) vs NVB + CDDP (NP) in patients (PTS) with inoperable non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract no. 1048]. Eur J Cancer 1991; 27: S172

    Google Scholar 

  99. Kusunoki Y, Furuse K, Yamori S, et al. Randomized phase II study of vinorelbine (VNR) vs vindesine (VDS) in previously untreated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract] (Presented at the 7th World Conference on Lung Cancer; 1994 Jun 26–Jul 1; Colorado Springs

  100. O’Rourke M, Crawford J, Schiller J, et al. Randomised study of intravenous vinorelbine (Navelbine) vs 5-fluorouracil + leucovorin. Seminars in Oncology 1994; September, in press

    Google Scholar 

  101. Berthaud P, Le Chevalier T, Ruffie P, et al. Phase I-II study of vinorelbine (Navelbine®) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cancer 1992; 28A: 1863–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Brooks BJ, Gralla RJ, McGraw HJ. Cisplatin + vinorelbine (navelbine) combination chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: testing the efficacy of a regimen designed to reduce toxicity and increase dose-intensity [abstract no. 1162]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 348

    Google Scholar 

  103. Filipazzi V, Rho B, Beghi G, et al. Chemotherapy with cisplatin + vinorelbine (DDP + NVB) in the treatment of advanced non small cell lung cancer [abstract no. 127]. Presented at the 9th Mediterranean Congress of Chemotherapy; 1994 Jun 12–17; Milan

  104. Lebeau B, Clavier J, Kleisbauer J-P, et al. Phase II study of Navelbine®-cisplatin in non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine® (vinorelbine). Update and new trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 141–5

    Google Scholar 

  105. Jacoulet P, Dubiez A, Depierre A, et al. One-week versus 3-weeks interval in the administration of cisplatine in combination with vinorelbine: a randomized study in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract no. 1013]. Proceedings of ASCO 1992; 11: 301

    Google Scholar 

  106. Baldini E, Tibaldi C, Chella A, et al. Combination chemotherapy with vinorelbine, ifosfamide and cisplatin: a phase II study in stage IIIB-IV non-small cell lung cancer. Seminars in Oncology 1994; 21 Suppl. 4: 12–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  107. Cornelia P, Casaretti R, Daponte A, et al. Combination of vinorelbine, cisplatin, and etoposide in advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma: a pilot study. J Chemother 1994; 6: 67–71

    Google Scholar 

  108. Drinkard L, Samuels B, Hoffman P, et al. A phase I-II trial of cisplatin (CDDP), 5 fluorouracil (5FU), leucovorin (PFL) and navelbine (NVB) in advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract no. 1203]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 356

    Google Scholar 

  109. Monnet I, Azli N, Voisin S, et al. Fluorouracil (FU)/folinic acid (FA)/vinorelbine (VNB)/cisplatin (P) in non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a phase II study [abstract no. 122]. Ann Oncol 1992; 2 Suppl. 5: 31

    Google Scholar 

  110. Perol M, Guerin JC, Kleisbauer JP, et al. Multicenter randomized trial comparing cisplatin-mitomycin-vindesine vs cisplatin-mitomycin-navelbine in advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract]. Presented at the 7th World Conference on Lung Cancer; 1994 Jun 26–Jul 1: Colorado Springs

  111. Drinkard L, Hoffman P, Bitran J, et al. Ifosfamide (I) in combination with Navelbine (N) or taxol (T) and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) support in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): 2 parallel phase I-II trials [abstract]. Presented at the 7th World Conference on Lung Cancer; 1994 Jun 26–Jul 1; Colorado Springs

  112. Marantz A, Lewi D, Litovska S. Phase II study of vinorelbine (VN) and ifosfamide (IFX) for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract no. 1071]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 325

    Google Scholar 

  113. Morere JM, Israel L, Brunet A, et al. Ifosfamide (IFX) and vinorelbine (NVB) in advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract no. 1149]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 344

    Google Scholar 

  114. Gridelli C, Rossi A, Palazzolo G, et al. Mitomycin C etoposide and vinorelbine (MEV II) in the treatment of metastatic stage IV non small cell lung cancer. Tumori 1994; 80: 128–30

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  115. Breau JL, Morere JF, Boaziz C, et al. Combination Navelbine® — cisplatin-etoposide in bronchial adenocarcinomas. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine® (vinorelbine). Update and new trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 179–84

    Google Scholar 

  116. Arriagada R, Pellae-Cosset B, Nasr E, et al. Combined radiotherapy and chemotherapy in non small cell lung cancer. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine® (vinorelbine). Update and new trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 79–88

    Google Scholar 

  117. Viallet J, Rousseau P, Souhami L, et al. A phase I/II trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) with cisplatin and vinorelbine (Navelbine®) followed by accelerated thoracic irradiation (TRT) in inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Early toxicities and responses [abstract]. Presented at the 7th World Conference on Lung Cancer; 1994 Jun 26–Jul 1; Colorado Springs

  118. Carles P, Quoix E, Guérin JC, et al. Presentation of Navelbine® combinations in the treatment of non small cell lung cancer. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine® (vinorelbine). Update and new trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 137–40

    Google Scholar 

  119. Crawford J, O’Rourke MA, Hohneker J, et al. A phase I/II trial of carboplatin and Navelbine® in advanced non small cell lung cancer [abstract no. 1176]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 351

    Google Scholar 

  120. Santomaggio C, Righi R, Tucci E, et al. Carboplatin (CBDCA) and vinorelbine (V) in the treatment of patients (PTS) affected by advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 360

    Google Scholar 

  121. Thomas P, Robinet G, Clavier J, et al. Carboplatin and vinorelbine in brain metastases of bronchogenic carcinoma [abstract no. 174]. Ann Oncol 1992; 3 Suppl. 5: 44

    Google Scholar 

  122. Yokes EE, Rosenberg R, Jahanzab M, et al. Oral navelbine (NVB) for advanced stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract]. Presented at the 7th World Conference on Lung Cancer; 1994 Jun 26–Jul 1; Colorado Springs

  123. Moinpour C, Donaldson G, McSorley P, et al. Quality of life (QL) assessments in patients with NSCLC treated on navelbine clinical trials [abstract]. Presented at the 7th World Conference on Lung Cancer; 1994 Jun 26–Jul 1; Colorado Springs

  124. Vergnenégre A, Pham E, Perol M, et al. Cost effectiveness analysis of two chemotherapy regimens in a randomized multicenter trial for stage III and IV non small cell lung cancer [abstract]. Presented at the 7th World Conference on Lung Cancer; 1994 Jun 26–Jul 1; Colorado Springs

  125. Cannistra SA. Cancer of the ovary. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1550–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  126. Héron JF, George MJ, Kerbrat P, et al. Phase II study of Navelbine® as second or third line treatment in advanced ovarian carcinoma. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine (vinorelbine). Update and New Trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 231–6

    Google Scholar 

  127. Pinel MC, Pinon G, Goudier MJ, et al. Study of the combination vinorelbine-hexamethyl-melamine (V-H) in advanced ovarian adenocarcinoma: preliminary results of a phase I-II study NHO-88, from the ARTAC multicentric ovarian carcinoma study group. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine® (vinorelbine). Update and new trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 237–53

    Google Scholar 

  128. Benchekroun S, Chouffai Z, Harif M, et al. Clinical study of Navelbine® activity in Hodgkin’s disease. Phase II study. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine® (vinorelbine). Update and new trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 261–4

    Google Scholar 

  129. Bruno S, Savignano R, Corrado C, et al. Vinorelbine (NVB): a new vinca alkaloid active in refractory/relapsed lymphomas. A phase II study [abstract no. 1300]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 383

    Google Scholar 

  130. Eghbali H. Phase II study of vinorelbine (Navelbine®) in previously treated Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkins’s lymphomas. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine (vinorelbine). Update and New Trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 253–60

    Google Scholar 

  131. Fermé C, Oberlin O, Boubdallah K, et al. Methyl-GAG, ifosfamide, navelbine, etoposide (MINE) as salvage therapy for refractory or relapsed Hodgkin’s disease (HD) [abstract no. 970]. Proceedings of ASCO 1991; 10: 278

    Google Scholar 

  132. Gebbia V, Testa A, Valenza R, et al. A pilot study of vinorelbine on a weekly schedule in recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A: 1358–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  133. Gebbia V, Testa A, Valenza R, et al. Vinorelbine plus cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell head and neck carcinoma [abstract no. 917]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 283

    Google Scholar 

  134. Burger RA, DiSaia PJ, Boyle J, et al. Phase II trial of Navelbine in the treatment of women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer [abstract no. 15]. Gynecol Oncol 1993; 50: 268–9

    Google Scholar 

  135. Conroy T, Etienne P-L, Adenis A, et al. Vinorelbine (Navelbine®): a promising drug in metastatic epidermoid esophageal carcinoma (MEEC) [abstract no. 553]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 191

    Google Scholar 

  136. Jassem J, Karnicka-Mlodkowska H, van Pottelsberghe C, et al. Phase II study of vinorelbine (Navelbine®) in previously treated small cell lung cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A: 1720–2

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  137. Fields S, Burris III H, Wilding G, et al. Evaluating the role of Navelbine in hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC): a clinical benefit model [abstract no. 727]. Proceedings of ASCO 1994; 13: 235

    Google Scholar 

  138. Canobbio L, Boccardo F, Guarneri D, et al. Phase II study of Navelbine in advanced renal cell carcinoma. Eur J Cancer 1991; 27: 804–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  139. Wilding G, Kirkwood J, Clamon G, et al. Phase II trial of Navelbine in metastatic renal cancer [abstract no. 798]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 253

    Google Scholar 

  140. Casey SJ, Quigley M, Retsas S. Phase II study of vinorebine (VRB) in metastatic malignant melanoma (MMM) [abstract no. 954]. Eur J Cancer 1991; 27 Suppl. 2: S159

    Google Scholar 

  141. Tominaga T, Nomura Y, Furuse K, et al. Early phase II study of Navelbine (vinorelbine) [abstract no. 271]. Ann Oncol 1992; 3 Suppl. 1: 127

    Google Scholar 

  142. Bokemeyer C, Droz J-P, Hanauske A, et al. Treatment of relapsed nonseminomatous germ cell tumors with vinorelbine: a trial of the phase I/II study group of the Association for Medical Oncology of the German Cancer Society. Onkologie 1993; 16: 29–31

    Google Scholar 

  143. Le Cesne A, Droz JP, Kattan J, et al. Phase II trial of a combination of ifosfamide (I), navelbine (N) and epirubicin (E) as salvage chemotherapy (CT) in refractory germ cell tumours (RGCT) [abstract]. Proceedings of ASCO 1991; 10: 174

    Google Scholar 

  144. Mahjoubi M, Kattan J, Droz J-P, et al. Feasibility trial of a combination of vinorelbine, ifosfamide, fluorouracil and folinic acid (VIF regimen) in advanced urothelial cancer. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A: 285–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  145. Gridelli C, De Placido S, Pepe R, et al. Phase I study of epirubicin plus vinorelbine with or without G-CSF in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A: 1729–31

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  146. Gralla RJ, Kardinal CG, Clark RA, et al. Enhancing the safety, efficacy, and dose intensity of vinorelbine (Navelbine) in combination chemotherapy regimens [abstract]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 336

    Google Scholar 

  147. Besenval M, Leray F, Delgado FM, et al. Navelbine® (vinorelbine) tolerance in non small cell lung cancer. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine® (vinorelbine). Update and new trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 185–98

    Google Scholar 

  148. Dubos C, Prévost JN, Brun J, et al. Infarctus myocardique et vinorelbine. Rev Mal Resp 1991; 8: 299–300

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  149. Cecchi R, Tuci F, Giomi A, et al. Supravenous hyperpigmentation induced by vinorelbine. Dermatology 1994; 188: 244

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  150. Misery L, Perrot JL, Vergnon JM, et al. Nécrolyse épidermique localisée après injection intraveineuse de vinorelbine. Presse Med 1992; 21: 2153

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  151. Lucas S, Rowinsky E, Wargin J, et al. Results of a study of the effect of food on the bioavailability (BA) and pharmacokinetics (PK) of Navelbine® (NVB) liquid-filled soft gelatin capsules [abstract no. 438]. Proceedings of ASCO 1993; 12: 160

    Google Scholar 

  152. Lasota WS, de Valeriola DL, Piccart MJ. Potential role of oral anthracyclines in older patients with cancer. Drugs Aging 1994; 4: 392–402

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  153. Tubiana M. Introduction. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine (vinorelbine). Update and New Trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: XVII–X

    Google Scholar 

  154. Yancik R, Ries LG, Yates JW. Breast cancer in aging women: a population-based study of contrasts in stage, surgery, and survival. Cancer 1989; 63: 976–81

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  155. Souquet PJ, Chauvin F, Boissel JP, et al. Polychemotherapy in advanced non small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Lancet 1993; 342: 19–21

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  156. Joss RA. Navelbine® and non small cell lung cancer. Some general remarks. In: Solal-Celigny P, editor. Navelbine® (vinorelbine). Update and new trends. Montrouge: John Libbey Eurotext Limited, 1991: 129–32

    Google Scholar 

  157. Sorensen JB. Treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: new cytostatic agents. Lung Cancer 1993; 10: 173–87

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  158. Budman DR. New vinca alkaloids and related compounds. Semin Oncol 1992; 19: 639–45

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  159. Winer E, O’Rourke M, Vogel C, et al. A US multicenter phase II trial of oral Navelbine® in elderly women with advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treatment 1993; 27: 136

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Adis International Limited, 41 Centorian Drive, Private Bag 65901, Mairangi Bay, Auckland 10, New Zealand

    Karen L. Goa & Diana Faulds

Authors
  1. Karen L. Goa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Diana Faulds
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Various sections of the manuscript reviewed by: D. Bisset, CRC Department of Medical Oncology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland; C. Bokemeyer, Abkeilung Hämatologie/Onkologie, Medizinische Hochschule, Hannover, Germany; D. R. Budman, North Shore University Hospital, Cornell University Medical College, Manhasset, New York, USA; G. N. Hortobagyi, Department of Medical Oncology, M. D.Anderson Cancer Center, University of Texas, Houston, Texas, USA; N. Ibrahim, Department of Medical Oncology, M. D. Anderson Cancer Centre, University of Texas, Houston, Texas, USA; H. Niitani, Department of Internal Medicine 4, Nippon Medical College, Tokyo, Japan; A. Photiou, Melanoma Unit, Department of Medical Oncology, Charing Cross Hospital, London, England; P. Potier, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Institut de Chimie des Substances Naturelles, Gif-sur-Yvette, France; A. Romero, Grupo Oncológico Cooperativo del Sur, Bahia Bianca, Argentina; C. Twelves, Clinical Oncology Unit, Guy’s Hospital, London, England.

An erratum to this article is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF03258535.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Goa, K.L., Faulds, D. Vinorelbine. Drugs & Aging 5, 200–234 (1994). https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-199405030-00006

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-199405030-00006

Keywords

Search

Navigation