Cargando…
Randomised phase III trial of carboplatin plus etoposide vs split doses of cisplatin plus etoposide in elderly or poor-risk patients with extensive disease small-cell lung cancer: JCOG 9702
We compared the efficacy and the safety of a carboplatin plus etoposide regimen (CE) vs split doses of cisplatin plus etoposide (SPE) in elderly or poor-risk patients with extensive disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC). Eligibility criteria included: untreated ED-SCLC; age ⩾70 and performance st...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2007
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2360311/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17579629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6603810 |
Sumario: | We compared the efficacy and the safety of a carboplatin plus etoposide regimen (CE) vs split doses of cisplatin plus etoposide (SPE) in elderly or poor-risk patients with extensive disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC). Eligibility criteria included: untreated ED-SCLC; age ⩾70 and performance status 0–2, or age <70 and PS 3. The CE arm received carboplatin area under the curve of five intravenously (IV) on day 1 and etoposide 80 mg m(−2) IV on days 1–3. The SPE arm received cisplatin 25 mg m(−2) IV on days 1–3 and etoposide 80 mg m(−2) IV on days 1–3. Both regimens were given with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support in a 21–28 day cycle for four courses. A total of 220 patients were randomised. Median age was 74 years and 74% had a PS of 0 or 1. Major grade 3–4 toxicities were (%CE/%SPE): leucopenia 54/51, neutropenia 95/90, thrombocytopenia 56/16, infection 7/6. There was no significant difference (CE/SPE) in the response rate (73/73%) and overall survival (median 10.6/9.9 mo; P=0.54). Palliation scores were very similar between the arms. Although the SPE regimen is still considered to be the standard treatment in elderly or poor-risk patients with ED-SCLC, the CE regimen can be an alternative for this population considering the risk–benefit balance. |
---|