Literature DB >> 18813830

Comparison of cisplatin-paclitaxel combination versus cisplatin-etoposide in patients with small-cell lung cancer: a Phase III study.

John Dimitroulis1, Angeliki Rapti, George P Stathopoulos, Sotiris Rigatos, John Stathopoulos, John Koutantos, Athanasios Athanasiadis, Kyriaki Tsikritsaki, Dimitris Karaindros, Kostas Katis, Dimosthenis Antoniou, Michalis Toumbis, Pantelis Giamboudakis.   

Abstract

Cisplatin-paclitaxel and cisplatin-etoposide combination therapies were compared in limited and extensive disease in patients with small-cell lung cancer. The primary objectives were to determine median and overall survival, time to tumor progression and tolerance and the secondary objective, the response rate. From January 2003 till July 2007, 108 patients were enrolled in the study. All patients had histologically- or cytologically-confirmed small-cell lung cancer. All patients were chemotherapy and radiotherapy naive. The patients were designated to receive six cycles: in the investigational Arm A, cisplatin, 80 mg/m(2) and paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) were infused on day 1 (1 cycle) and repeated every 3 weeks. In the control Arm B, cisplatin, 80 mg/m(2) was administered on day 1 and etoposide, 120 mg/m(2) per day was given on days 1-3 (1 cycle), every 3 weeks. In Arm A, 6 (11.3%) patients achieved a complete response and 32 (58.1%), a partial response; in Arm B, 7 (12.7%) patients achieved a complete response and 32 (58.2%) a partial response. The median survival time in Arm A patients was 12 months and in Arm B, 13 months, p=0.354. The time to tumor progression (TTP) was 8 and 6 months for Arms A and B, respectively (p=0.060). Toxicity, although common in both Arms, was acceptable. Neutropenia, anemia and diarrhea were higher in the control Arm. The cisplatin-paclitaxel combination is not superior to cisplatin-etoposide with respect to survival, TTP, toxicity and response rate. The former combination could be applied as an alternative chemotherapy regimen for patients with limited or advanced small-cell lung cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18813830

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncol Rep        ISSN: 1021-335X            Impact factor:   3.906


  6 in total

1.  Significant Association of Interleukin-16 Genetic Variations to Taiwanese Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Meng-Feng Wu; Yun-Chi Wang; Te-Chun Shen; Wen-Shin Chang; Hsin-Ting Li; Cheng-Hsi Liao; Chi-Li Gong; Zhi-Hong Wang; Chia-Wen Tsai; Te-Chun Hsia; DA-Tian Bau
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2020 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.155

2.  Irinotecan plus carboplatin in patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Young Saing Kim; Se Hoon Park; Sun Young Kyung; Sun Jin Sym; Sang Pyo Lee; Jeong Woong Park; Sung Hwan Jung; Jinny Park; Eun Kyung Cho; Jae Hoon Lee; Dong Bok Shin
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2010-03-03       Impact factor: 3.064

3.  Combination of three cytotoxic agents in small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  G P Stathopoulos; D Trafalis; J Dimitroulis; Ch Kosmas; J Stathopoulos; D Tsavdaridis
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  2012-11-18       Impact factor: 3.333

4.  Budget impact model of avelumab in patients with metastatic merkel cell carcinoma in the US.

Authors:  Murtuza Bharmal; Mairead Kearney; Ying Zheng; Hemant Phatak
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2019-05-22

5.  Interleukin 12 shows a better curative effect on lung cancer than paclitaxel and cisplatin doublet chemotherapy.

Authors:  Ting Yue; Xiaodong Zheng; Yaling Dou; Xiaohu Zheng; Rui Sun; Zhigang Tian; Haiming Wei
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-08-22       Impact factor: 4.430

6.  A cost-utility analysis of avelumab for metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma in Taiwan.

Authors:  Wen-Cheng Chang; Amy Y Lin; Jason C Hsu; Chiao-En Wu; Connie Goh; Patrick Chou; Kaitlin Kuo; Anne Chang; Roberto Palencia
Journal:  Cancer Rep (Hoboken)       Date:  2021-05-02
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.