PURPOSE:Irinotecan plus cisplatin (IP) improved survival over etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) in Japanese patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (E-SCLC). To confirm those results and discern the potential role of population-related pharmacogenomics (PG) in outcomes, we conducted a large randomized trial of identical design to the Japanese trial in North American patients with E-SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to IP (irinotecan 60 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15; cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) day 1, every 4 weeks) or EP (etoposide 100 mg/m(2) on days 1 through 3; cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) day 1, every 3 weeks). Blood specimens for genomic DNA analysis were collected before random assignment in 169 patients. RESULTS: Of 671 patients, 651 were eligible (324 and 327 patients in the IP and EP arms, respectively). Response rates with IP and EP were 60% and 57%, respectively (P = .56). Median progression-free survival for IP and EP was 5.8 and 5.2 months, respectively (P = .07). Median overall survival for IP and EP was 9.9 and 9.1 months, respectively (P = .71). Severe diarrhea was more common with IP (19% v 3%); severe neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were higher with EP versus IP (68% v 33% and 15% v 4%, respectively). PG analysis showed that ABCB1 (C3435T)T/T (membrane transport) was associated with IP-related diarrhea; UGT1A1 (G-3156A)A/A (drug metabolism) was associated with IP-related neutropenia. CONCLUSION: This large North American trial failed to confirm the previously reported survival benefit observed with IP in Japanese patients. Both regimens produced comparable efficacy, with less hematologic and greater gastrointestinal toxicity with IP. These results emphasize the potential importance of PG in interpreting trials of cancer therapy.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE:Irinotecan plus cisplatin (IP) improved survival over etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) in Japanese patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (E-SCLC). To confirm those results and discern the potential role of population-related pharmacogenomics (PG) in outcomes, we conducted a large randomized trial of identical design to the Japanese trial in North American patients with E-SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to IP (irinotecan 60 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15; cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) day 1, every 4 weeks) or EP (etoposide 100 mg/m(2) on days 1 through 3; cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) day 1, every 3 weeks). Blood specimens for genomic DNA analysis were collected before random assignment in 169 patients. RESULTS: Of 671 patients, 651 were eligible (324 and 327 patients in the IP and EP arms, respectively). Response rates with IP and EP were 60% and 57%, respectively (P = .56). Median progression-free survival for IP and EP was 5.8 and 5.2 months, respectively (P = .07). Median overall survival for IP and EP was 9.9 and 9.1 months, respectively (P = .71). Severe diarrhea was more common with IP (19% v 3%); severe neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were higher with EP versus IP (68% v 33% and 15% v 4%, respectively). PG analysis showed that ABCB1 (C3435T)T/T (membrane transport) was associated with IP-related diarrhea; UGT1A1(G-3156A)A/A (drug metabolism) was associated with IP-related neutropenia. CONCLUSION: This large North American trial failed to confirm the previously reported survival benefit observed with IP in Japanese patients. Both regimens produced comparable efficacy, with less hematologic and greater gastrointestinal toxicity with IP. These results emphasize the potential importance of PG in interpreting trials of cancer therapy.
Authors: Ryan A Wilcox; Benjamin Djulbegovic; H Lee Moffitt; Gordon H Guyatt; Victor M Montori Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-01-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nasser Hanna; Paul A Bunn; Corey Langer; Lawrence Einhorn; Troy Guthrie; Thaddeus Beck; Rafat Ansari; Peter Ellis; Michael Byrne; Mark Morrison; Subramanian Hariharan; Benjamin Wang; Alan Sandler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ramaswamy Govindan; Nathan Page; Daniel Morgensztern; William Read; Ryan Tierney; Anna Vlahiotis; Edward L Spitznagel; Jay Piccirillo Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-10-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Janelle M Hoskins; Eugenio Marcuello; Albert Altes; Sharon Marsh; Taylor Maxwell; Derek J Van Booven; Laia Paré; Robert Culverhouse; Howard L McLeod; Montserrat Baiget Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-03-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Shinichi Yachida; Efsevia Vakiani; Catherine M White; Yi Zhong; Tyler Saunders; Richard Morgan; Roeland F de Wilde; Anirban Maitra; Jessica Hicks; Angelo M Demarzo; Chanjuan Shi; Rajni Sharma; Daniel Laheru; Barish H Edil; Christopher L Wolfgang; Richard D Schulick; Ralph H Hruban; Laura H Tang; David S Klimstra; Christine A Iacobuzio-Donahue Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Taofeek K Owonikoko; Joseph Aisner; Xin Victoria Wang; Suzanne E Dahlberg; Eric H Rubin; Suresh S Ramalingam; Murugesan Gounder; Paul Gregory Rausch; Rita S Axelrod; Joan H Schiller Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2013-11-28 Impact factor: 3.333