Literature DB >> 7636529

Schedule dependency of 21-day oral versus 3-day intravenous etoposide in combination with intravenous cisplatin in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a randomized phase III study of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B.

A A Miller1, J E Herndon, D R Hollis, J Ellerton, A Langleben, F Richards, M R Green.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This was a randomized phase III study to test the schedule dependency of etoposide given as a conventional 3-day intravenous (IV) regimen versus a prolonged 21-day oral regimen for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Both regimens contained IV cisplatin. The objectives were to compare survival (primary end point) and to establish response rates, failure-free survival, and toxicity (secondary end points). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with untreated measurable or assessable disease and normal organ function were eligible. Randomization was stratified according to performance status 0 versus 1 or 2. Treatment consisted of etoposide 130 mg/m2/d IV for 3 days and cisplatin 25 mg/m2/d IV for 3 days every 21 days for eight courses (schedule 1) versus etoposide 50 mg/m2/d orally for 21 days and cisplatin 33 mg/m2/d IV for 3 days every 28 days for six courses (schedule 2). In 1990, bioavailability of oral etoposide was assumed to be 50%, and the study was designed to deliver the same total doses of etoposide and cisplatin on both regimens over 24 weeks without the use of growth factors.
RESULTS: Between December 1990 and October 1993, 306 eligible patients were entered. Of these, 69% were male and 66% were > or = 60 years of age; 21% had a performance status of 0, 47% a performance status of 1, and 32% a performance status of 2; 156 were randomized to receive schedule 1 and 150 to receive schedule 2. Overall median survival estimates were 9.5 and 9.9 months (difference not significant) for schedule 1 and schedule 2, respectively. The 95% confidence interval (CI) for overall survival, 8 to 11 months, was the same for both schedules, with 126 and 117 deaths on schedule 1 and 2, respectively. Both schedules also resulted in the same median failure-free survival estimate of 7 months (95% CI, 6 to 8 months on either schedule). Complete and partial responses were observed in 15% and 42% of patients on schedule 1 and 14% and 47% on schedule 2, respectively. The overall maximal hematologic toxicities grade 3 and 4 for leukocytes, neutrophils, platelets, and hemoglobin were, respectively, as follows: schedule 1, 62%, 85%, 32%, and 32%; schedule 2, 83%, 83%, 52%, and 53%. Lethal toxicity due to neutropenia and infection occurred in 4% of patients on schedule 1 and 10% on schedule 2 (difference not statistically significant).
CONCLUSION: The two schedules of etoposide in combination with cisplatin did not result in differences in treatment outcome with respect to tumor response and survival. However, a significantly greater rate of severe or life-threatening hematologic toxicity was noted on the 21-day oral etoposide treatment schedule.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7636529     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1995.13.8.1871

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  23 in total

1.  Intra-arterial cisplatin plus oral etoposide for the treatment of recurrent malignant glioma: a phase II study.

Authors:  L S Ashby; W R Shapiro
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 2.  [Oncology '96].

Authors:  F Hartmann; M Pfreundschuh
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  1997-02-15

3.  Cisplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab for untreated extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: CALGB 30306, a phase II study.

Authors:  Neal E Ready; Arkadiusz Z Dudek; Herbert H Pang; Lydia D Hodgson; Stephen L Graziano; Mark R Green; Everett E Vokes
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-10-03       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Multitrial Evaluation of Progression-Free Survival as a Surrogate End Point for Overall Survival in First-Line Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Nathan R Foster; Lindsay A Renfro; Steven E Schild; Mary W Redman; Xiaofei F Wang; Suzanne E Dahlberg; Keyue Ding; Penelope A Bradbury; Suresh S Ramalingam; David R Gandara; Taro Shibata; Nagahiro Saijo; Everett E Vokes; Alex A Adjei; Sumithra J Mandrekar
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 15.609

5.  Comparison of futility monitoring guidelines using completed phase III oncology trials.

Authors:  Qiang Zhang; Boris Freidlin; Edward L Korn; Susan Halabi; Sumithra Mandrekar; James J Dignam
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 2.486

6.  Randomized phase II Study of carboplatin and etoposide with or without the bcl-2 antisense oligonucleotide oblimersen for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: CALGB 30103.

Authors:  Charles M Rudin; Ravi Salgia; Xiaofei Wang; Lydia D Hodgson; Gregory A Masters; Mark Green; Everett E Vokes
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-02-20       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Differences in clinical trial patient attributes and outcomes according to enrollment setting.

Authors:  Elizabeth B Lamont; Mary Beth Landrum; Nancy L Keating; Laura Archer; Lan Lan; Gary M Strauss; Rogerio Lilenbaum; Harvey B Niell; L Herbert Maurer; Michael P Kosty; Antonius A Miller; Gerald H Clamon; Anthony D Elias; Edward F McClay; Everett E Vokes; Barbara J McNeil
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-11-23       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 8.  Pharmacokinetic optimisation of treatment with oral etoposide.

Authors:  Giuseppe Toffoli; Giuseppe Corona; Barbara Basso; Mauro Boiocchi
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 6.447

9.  The health-related quality of life and survival of small-cell lung cancer patients: results of a companion study to CALGB 9033.

Authors:  M J Naughton; J E Herndon; S A Shumaker; A A Miller; A B Kornblith; D Chao; J Holland
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 10.  Practical treatment guide for dose individualisation in cancer chemotherapy.

Authors:  P Canal; E Chatelut; S Guichard
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 9.546

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.