OBJECTIVE: Cisplatin-based combination therapy produces higher response rates and improved survival, in comparison to single-agent cisplatin in the treatment of cervical cancer. Cisplatin and paclitaxel (PT) requires a prolonged infusion and is less convenient and more toxic than the combination of carboplatin and paclitaxel (CT) leading to more widespread use of CT. The objective of this study was to compare response rate and survival in patients with cervical cancer treated with PT or CT. METHODS: A retrospective search of databases at the University of Oklahoma, Washington University-Barnes Jewish Christian Hospitals, Johns Hopkins University, and University of Alabama at Birmingham identified patients with stage IVB, recurrent or persistent cervical cancer who were treated with PT or CT. RESULTS: A total of 62 patients were identified. 14 were treated with PT and 48 with CT. There were no statistical differences between the groups in terms of demographics, prior radiation therapy, or median number of cycles. There was a trend toward a larger number of patients in the CT arm having received prior cisplatin/radiation (p=0.07). Objective responses occurred in 29% of patients receiving PT vs. 53% of patients receiving CT. With a median follow-up of 9 months, survival was not different with a median survival of 14 and 11 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective evaluation, CT compares favorably with PT and demonstrates a superior overall response rate. Because of its ease of administration and improved toxicity profile, CT should be considered in the treatment of advanced, recurrent or progressive cervical cancer.
OBJECTIVE:Cisplatin-based combination therapy produces higher response rates and improved survival, in comparison to single-agent cisplatin in the treatment of cervical cancer. Cisplatin and paclitaxel (PT) requires a prolonged infusion and is less convenient and more toxic than the combination of carboplatin and paclitaxel (CT) leading to more widespread use of CT. The objective of this study was to compare response rate and survival in patients with cervical cancer treated with PT or CT. METHODS: A retrospective search of databases at the University of Oklahoma, Washington University-Barnes Jewish Christian Hospitals, Johns Hopkins University, and University of Alabama at Birmingham identified patients with stage IVB, recurrent or persistent cervical cancer who were treated with PT or CT. RESULTS: A total of 62 patients were identified. 14 were treated with PT and 48 with CT. There were no statistical differences between the groups in terms of demographics, prior radiation therapy, or median number of cycles. There was a trend toward a larger number of patients in the CT arm having received prior cisplatin/radiation (p=0.07). Objective responses occurred in 29% of patients receiving PT vs. 53% of patients receiving CT. With a median follow-up of 9 months, survival was not different with a median survival of 14 and 11 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective evaluation, CT compares favorably with PT and demonstrates a superior overall response rate. Because of its ease of administration and improved toxicity profile, CT should be considered in the treatment of advanced, recurrent or progressive cervical cancer.
Authors: M McCormack; L Kadalayil; A Hackshaw; M A Hall-Craggs; R P Symonds; V Warwick; H Simonds; I Fernando; M Hammond; L James; A Feeney; J A Ledermann Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-05-21 Impact factor: 7.640