PURPOSE:Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may represent an alternative to irradiation in locally advanced squamous cell cervical cancer. Aims of this study were to compare a three-drug (paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin [TIP]) with a two-drug (ifosfamide and cisplatin [IP]) regimen and to assess the prognostic value of pathologic response on survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 219) were randomly assigned to ifosfamide 5 g/m(2) during 24 hours plus cisplatin 75 mg/m(2), or paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) plus ifosfamide 5 g/m(2) during 24 hours and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for three courses. RESULTS: Grades 3 to 4 neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia were more frequent with TIP. We recorded four deaths related to toxicity. The optimal pathologic response (OPT) rate (residual disease < 3 mm stromal invasion) was higher with TIP than with IP (48% v 23%; odds ratio, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.69 to 5.88; P = .0003). At a median follow-up of 43.4 months, 79 women experienced disease progression or died (46 in the IP arm, 33 in the TIP arm). Patients receiving TIP experienced a treatment failure rate 25% less than those receiving IP, but this difference was not statistically significant (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.17; P = .20). Sixty-one patients died (37 in the IP arm, 24 in the TIP arm), and the HR of death was in favor of TIP, although not significantly (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.10; P = .11). In patients assessable for response (n = 189), the average death rates were higher in the group that did not achieve OPT (HR, 5.88; 95% CI, 2.50 to 13.84; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The TIP regimen is associated with a higher response rate than the IP regimen, without a statistically significant effect on overall survival. OPT was a prognostic factor for survival.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may represent an alternative to irradiation in locally advanced squamous cell cervical cancer. Aims of this study were to compare a three-drug (paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin [TIP]) with a two-drug (ifosfamide and cisplatin [IP]) regimen and to assess the prognostic value of pathologic response on survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 219) were randomly assigned to ifosfamide 5 g/m(2) during 24 hours plus cisplatin 75 mg/m(2), or paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) plus ifosfamide 5 g/m(2) during 24 hours and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for three courses. RESULTS: Grades 3 to 4 neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia were more frequent with TIP. We recorded four deaths related to toxicity. The optimal pathologic response (OPT) rate (residual disease < 3 mm stromal invasion) was higher with TIP than with IP (48% v 23%; odds ratio, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.69 to 5.88; P = .0003). At a median follow-up of 43.4 months, 79 women experienced disease progression or died (46 in the IP arm, 33 in the TIP arm). Patients receiving TIP experienced a treatment failure rate 25% less than those receiving IP, but this difference was not statistically significant (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.17; P = .20). Sixty-one patients died (37 in the IP arm, 24 in the TIP arm), and the HR of death was in favor of TIP, although not significantly (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.10; P = .11). In patients assessable for response (n = 189), the average death rates were higher in the group that did not achieve OPT (HR, 5.88; 95% CI, 2.50 to 13.84; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The TIP regimen is associated with a higher response rate than the IP regimen, without a statistically significant effect on overall survival. OPT was a prognostic factor for survival.
Authors: C Kosmas; N Mylonakis; G Tsakonas; G Vorgias; N Karvounis; N Tsavaris; T Daladimos; N Kalinoglou; N Malamos; T Akrivos; A Karabelis Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-09-08 Impact factor: 7.640