OBJECTIVE: To determine the outcome of all patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) treated at the US National Cancer Institute between April 1973 and April 1993. DESIGN: We retrospectively analyzed a series of 594 consecutive patients with SCLC treated at a single institution during a 20-year period to assess changes in duration of survival and toxicity related to various treatment regimens. MATERIAL AND METHODS: For analysis, patients were grouped by decade, and the duration of survival of patients with limited- and extensive-stage SCLC was examined to assess whether patients treated during the first decade of the study (1973 through 1983), when cyclophosphamide-based regimens were used, had different outcomes than those treated during the second decade (1983 through 1993), when cisplatin-based regimens were used. Patients had a minimal follow-up of 2 years. RESULTS: No significant difference was found in the survival of patients with limited- or extensive-stage SCLC treated during the second decade in comparison with during the first decade of the study. Among patients with extensive-stage SCLC, performance status 3 or 4 and metastatic lesions of the liver and central nervous system had a significant adverse effect on survival in both the first and the second decade. Among patients with limited-stage disease, performance status 3 or 4 had the most significant adverse influence on survival during the overall study period. In addition, in a multivariate analysis, etoposide-cisplatin plus twice-daily chest radiotherapy was significantly associated with prolonged survival (P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: We noted no significant change in the duration of survival of patients with either limited-or extensive-stage SCLC treated at our institution during a 20-year period. A multivariate analysis showed that patients with limited-stage SCLC given a cisplatin-based regimen plus chest radiotherapy lived modestly longer than similar patients given cyclophosphamide regimens at our institution. No evidence was found of changes in pretreatment factors that would affect survival.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the outcome of all patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) treated at the US National Cancer Institute between April 1973 and April 1993. DESIGN: We retrospectively analyzed a series of 594 consecutive patients with SCLC treated at a single institution during a 20-year period to assess changes in duration of survival and toxicity related to various treatment regimens. MATERIAL AND METHODS: For analysis, patients were grouped by decade, and the duration of survival of patients with limited- and extensive-stage SCLC was examined to assess whether patients treated during the first decade of the study (1973 through 1983), when cyclophosphamide-based regimens were used, had different outcomes than those treated during the second decade (1983 through 1993), when cisplatin-based regimens were used. Patients had a minimal follow-up of 2 years. RESULTS: No significant difference was found in the survival of patients with limited- or extensive-stage SCLC treated during the second decade in comparison with during the first decade of the study. Among patients with extensive-stage SCLC, performance status 3 or 4 and metastatic lesions of the liver and central nervous system had a significant adverse effect on survival in both the first and the second decade. Among patients with limited-stage disease, performance status 3 or 4 had the most significant adverse influence on survival during the overall study period. In addition, in a multivariate analysis, etoposide-cisplatin plus twice-daily chest radiotherapy was significantly associated with prolonged survival (P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: We noted no significant change in the duration of survival of patients with either limited-or extensive-stage SCLC treated at our institution during a 20-year period. A multivariate analysis showed that patients with limited-stage SCLC given a cisplatin-based regimen plus chest radiotherapy lived modestly longer than similar patients given cyclophosphamide regimens at our institution. No evidence was found of changes in pretreatment factors that would affect survival.
Authors: Alan H Bryce; Bassam Mattar; Shauna L Hillman; Alex A Adjei; John W Kugler; Kendrith Rowland; Donald B Wender; Gamini Soori; Edith A Perez; James R Jett Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 2.339
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