INTRODUCTION: This study was aimed at comparing the efficiency and tolerability of two reference protocols Cisplatin and Etoposide and Cisplatin and Vinorelbine in advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 60 patients (two groups consisting of 30 patients) were treated for advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer during the period from January to December 2005 according to the reference protocols (Cisplatin 100 mg/m2 D1; Vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 D1, D8 on 4 weeks) and (Cisplatin 100 mg/m D1; Etoposide 100 mg/m2 D1, D3, D5 on 4 weeks) at the Department of Oncology of KBC "Bezanijska kosa". All patients were analysed for tumour response, progression free survival as well as for toxicity. X2 test, Kaplan Meiers curves and Log rank test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Although the recorded response rates were a bit lower than in previously published trials, they were not significantly different p = 0.485. No statistically significant difference was recorded in either progression free survival or overall survival. The chemotherapeutical Cisplatin/Etoposide protocol proved to be more toxic both in hematologic (3% vs. 10%) and total toxicities (p = 0.047). CONCLUSION: Our study proved both protocols to have equivalent efficacy. However, the Cisplatin, Vinorelbine protocol could be recommended because of its less expressed toxic effects.
INTRODUCTION: This study was aimed at comparing the efficiency and tolerability of two reference protocols Cisplatin and Etoposide and Cisplatin and Vinorelbine in advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 60 patients (two groups consisting of 30 patients) were treated for advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer during the period from January to December 2005 according to the reference protocols (Cisplatin 100 mg/m2 D1; Vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 D1, D8 on 4 weeks) and (Cisplatin 100 mg/m D1; Etoposide 100 mg/m2 D1, D3, D5 on 4 weeks) at the Department of Oncology of KBC "Bezanijska kosa". All patients were analysed for tumour response, progression free survival as well as for toxicity. X2 test, Kaplan Meiers curves and Log rank test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Although the recorded response rates were a bit lower than in previously published trials, they were not significantly different p = 0.485. No statistically significant difference was recorded in either progression free survival or overall survival. The chemotherapeutical Cisplatin/Etoposide protocol proved to be more toxic both in hematologic (3% vs. 10%) and total toxicities (p = 0.047). CONCLUSION: Our study proved both protocols to have equivalent efficacy. However, the Cisplatin, Vinorelbine protocol could be recommended because of its less expressed toxic effects.