J Y Han1, B H Nam2, H Y Kim3, S J Yoon3, H T Kim1, J S Lee4. 1. Center for Lung Cancer; Center for Clinical Trial, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea. 2. Center for Clinical Trial, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea. 3. Center for Lung Cancer. 4. Center for Lung Cancer. Electronic address: jslee@ncc.re.kr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We investigated the efficacy of irinotecan/cisplatin (IP) versus irinotecan/capecitabine (IX) with or without isosorbide-5-mononitrate (ISMN) in chemo-naïve advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Initially, 74 patients were randomly assigned to either IP or IX. Given the potential benefits of ISMN on chemotherapy, the protocol was amended during the study. Subsequently, 72 patients were randomly assigned to either IP + ISMN or IX + ISMN. Patients were treated with predefined second-line therapies (docetaxel/capecitabine for IP or IP + ISMN, docetaxel/cisplatin for IX or IX + ISMN) when disease progressed. RESULTS: A total of 146 received treatment. Response rate (RR), median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 49%, 5.5 months, 14.5 months in IP; 33%, 3.3 months, 13.0 months in IP + ISMN; 30%, 4.3 months, 16.1 months in IX; and 25%, 3.4 months, 13.6 months in IX + ISMN, respectively. While IP arm showed a trend toward higher RR and longer PFS than IX arm, IX arm showed a trend toward longer OS than IP arm. No significant differences were observed between IP + ISMN and IX + ISMN. CONCLUSION: IP showed better RR and PFS but no OS benefit when compared with IX. The addition of ISMN to IP or IX chemotherapy did not seem to improve the treatment outcome.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: We investigated the efficacy of irinotecan/cisplatin (IP) versus irinotecan/capecitabine (IX) with or without isosorbide-5-mononitrate (ISMN) in chemo-naïve advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Initially, 74 patients were randomly assigned to either IP or IX. Given the potential benefits of ISMN on chemotherapy, the protocol was amended during the study. Subsequently, 72 patients were randomly assigned to either IP + ISMN or IX + ISMN. Patients were treated with predefined second-line therapies (docetaxel/capecitabine for IP or IP + ISMN, docetaxel/cisplatin for IX or IX + ISMN) when disease progressed. RESULTS: A total of 146 received treatment. Response rate (RR), median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 49%, 5.5 months, 14.5 months in IP; 33%, 3.3 months, 13.0 months in IP + ISMN; 30%, 4.3 months, 16.1 months in IX; and 25%, 3.4 months, 13.6 months in IX + ISMN, respectively. While IP arm showed a trend toward higher RR and longer PFS than IX arm, IX arm showed a trend toward longer OS than IP arm. No significant differences were observed between IP + ISMN and IX + ISMN. CONCLUSION:IP showed better RR and PFS but no OS benefit when compared with IX. The addition of ISMN to IP or IX chemotherapy did not seem to improve the treatment outcome.