Literature DB >> 12879472

Phase III trial of gemcitabine and carboplatin versus mitomycin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin or mitomycin, vinblastine, and cisplatin in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma.

Sarah Danson1, Mark R Middleton, Kenneth J O'Byrne, Mark Clemons, Malcolm Ranson, Jurjees Hassan, Heather Anderson, Paul A Burt, Corrine Fairve-Finn, Ronald Stout, Isabel Dowd, Linda Ashcroft, Cheryl Beresford, Nicholas Thatcher.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The authors compared gemcitabine and carboplatin (GC) with mitomycin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin (MIC) or mitomycin, vinblastine, and cisplatin (MVP) in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). The primary objective was survival. Secondary objectives were time to disease progression, response rates, evaluation of toxicity, disease-related symptoms, World Health Organization performance status (PS), and quality of life (QoL).
METHODS: Three hundred seventy-two chemotherapy-naïve patients with International Staging System Stage III/IV NSCLC who were ineligible for curative radiotherapy or surgery were randomized to receive either 4 cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) on Days 1, 8, and 15) plus carboplatin (area under the serum concentration-time curve, 5; given on Day 1) every 4 weeks (the GC arm) or MIC/MVP every 3 weeks (the MIC/MVP arm).
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in median survival (248 days in the MIC/MVP arm vs. 236 days in the GC arm) or time to progression (225 days in the MIC/MVP arm vs. 218 days in the GC arm) between the 2 treatment arms. The 2-year survival rate was 11.8% in the MIC/MVP arm and 6.9% in the GC arm. The 1-year survival rate was 32.5% in the MIC/MVP arm and 33.2% in the GC arm. In the MIC/MVP arm, 33% of patients responded (4 complete responses [CRs] and 57 partial responses [PRs]) whereas in the GC arm, 30% of patients responded (3 CRs and 54 PRs). Nonhematologic toxicity was comparable for patients with Grade 3-4 symptoms, except there was more alopecia among patients in the MIC/MVP arm. GC appeared to produce more hematologic toxicity and necessitated more transfusions. There was no difference in performance status, disease-related symptoms, or QoL between patients in the two treatment arms. Fewer inpatient stays for complications were required with GC.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study failed to demonstrate any difference in efficacy between the newer regimen of GC and the older regimens of MIC and MVP. Cancer 2003;98:542-53. Copyright 2003 American Cancer Society.DOI 10.1002/cncr.11535

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12879472     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.11535

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  9 in total

Review 1.  Quality-of-life assessment in phase III clinical trials of gemcitabine in non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Jonathan K Reynolds; Terri L Levien
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.923

Review 2.  Epidemiology of treatment-associated mucosal injury after treatment with newer regimens for lymphoma, breast, lung, or colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Jones; Elenir B C Avritscher; Catherine D Cooksley; Marisol Michelet; B Nebiyou Bekele; Linda S Elting
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-04-07       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Chemotherapy of lung cancer: A global perspective of the role of ifosfamide.

Authors:  Caicun Zhou; Christian Manegold
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03

4.  Quality of life in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving palliative chemotherapy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Ayako Matsuda; Kazue Yamaoka; Toshiro Tango
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 2.447

5.  An Uncommon Lung Neoplasm in a Young Patient: Diagnostic Challenges.

Authors:  Felipe Saceanu Leser; Lucas Dalsenter Romano; Kauê Ruan de Resende; José Roberto Lapa E Silva
Journal:  Am J Case Rep       Date:  2020-10-16

6.  The effect of PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy in the treatment of squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials.

Authors:  Shuang Li; Shuang Zhang; Jingjing Liu; Changliang Yang; Liang Zhang; Ying Cheng
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 2.895

7.  Combination phase I study of nedaplatin and gemcitabine for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  T Kurata; K Tamura; N Yamamoto; T Nogami; T Satoh; H Kaneda; K Nakagawa; M Fukuoka
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-06-01       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Systematic evaluation of the efficacy-effectiveness gap of systemic treatments in metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Christine M Cramer-van der Welle; Bas J M Peters; Franz M N H Schramel; Olaf H Klungel; Harry J M Groen; Ewoudt M W van de Garde
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  2018-12-20       Impact factor: 16.671

9.  Patient and Caregiver Preferences for First-Line Treatments of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Candice Yong; M Janelle Cambron-Mellott; Brian Seal; Oliver Will; Martine C Maculaitis; Kelly Clapp; Emily Mulvihill; Ion Cotarla; Ranee Mehra
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2022-01-15       Impact factor: 2.711

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.