Clarithromycin in the long-term treatment of primary lung cancer Possibility of clarithromycin as a biological response modifier

• Published in: CHEMOTHERAPY Vol. 42; no. 11; pp. 1293 - 1298
• Main Authors: Takeuchi, Shoji, Mikasa, Keiichi, Tsujimoto, Masayuki, Narita, Nobuhiro, Hamada, Kaoru, Sakamoto, Masahiro, Konishi, Mitsuru, Kashiba, Shuzo, Sawaki, Masayoshi, Kita, Eiji, Kunimatsu, Mikikazu, Teramoto, Shoji, Maeda, Kouichi, Fukuoka, Kazuya, Mori, Kei
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English; Japanese
• Published: Japanese Society of Chemotherapy 1994; 公益社団法人 日本化学療法学会
• Subjects: biological response modifier; clarithromycin; lung cancer
• ISSN: 0009-3165; 1884-5894
• DOI: 10.11250/chemotherapy1953.42.1293

The present authors investigated the utility and mechanism of long-term chemotherapy with erythromycin (EM) in the treatment of chronic lower respiratory tract infections. In parallel, we found that EM-clarithromycin (CAM) possesses properties as a biological response modifier (BRM), stimulating the activities of natural killer cells and producing various cytokines. Given these characteristics of CAM, investigations were performed on the effects of CAM on the survival of lung cancer patients receiving long-term administration of CAM. The subjects were 50 inpatients with primary lung cancer not indicated for surgical operation. They consisted of 43 males and 7 females, 41-82 years of age (64.5±9.8). Patients received concomitant application of radiotherapy with chemotherapy including CDDP; after discharge, they were allocated randomly into a CAM administration group and nonadministration group at their initial visit to the outpatient clinic, and subsequent survival times were compared between the two groups. Survival rate data were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and differences between the two groups were compared by the generalized Wilcoxon method and LongranK method. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, sex, stage, tissue type, basic treatment or efficacy rate. Results indicated that the survival curves of patients with small cell cancer were not significantly different between the two groups, but the 50% survival time of patients with non-small cell cancer was 930 days in the CAM administration group and 299 days in CAM non-administration group, indicating significant prolongation of survival in the CAM administration group (p=0.003). In conclusion, CAM was suggested to have potential as a BRM in eliciting prolongation of survival time in patients with lung cancer.