Dataset Information

A Phase III Randomized Study Comparing a Chemotherapy with Cisplatin and Etoposide to a Etoposide Regimen without Cisplatin for Patients with Extensive Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:In a literature meta-analysis, we showed survival benefits for regimens including cisplatin [hazard ratio (HR) 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.57-0.66] and for those including etoposide (HR 0.65; 0.61-0.69). That benefit was mainly observed when etoposide alone or in combination with cisplatin was included in the chemotherapy regimens. Our objective was to determine if chemotherapy with both drugs improves survival in comparison to a non-platinum regimen with etoposide. METHODS:Extensive small-cell lung cancer patients were randomized between cisplatin-etoposide (CE) and ifosfamide?+?etoposide + epirubicin regimen (IVE) between 2000 and 2013. RESULTS:176 and 170 eligible patients were allocated to CE and IVE (315 deaths were required before analysis), respectively. Objective response rates were not significantly different: 60% with CE and 59% with IVE. No statistically significant difference in median survival and 1-year and 2-year was observed with rates of 9.6?months, 31 and 5% for CE and 10?months, 39 and 9% for IVE, respectively. HR was 0.84 (95% CI 0.68-1.05, p?=?0.16). Only two prognostic factors for survival were retained in multivariate analysis: sex with HR?=?0.69 (95% CI 0.49-0.97, p?=?0.03) and performance status with HR?=?0.53 (95% CI 0.49-0.97, p?

SUBMITTER: Berghmans T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5610723 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Phase III Randomized Study Comparing a Chemotherapy with Cisplatin and Etoposide to a Etoposide Regimen without Cisplatin for Patients with Extensive Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Berghmans Thierry T Scherpereel Arnaud A Meert Anne-Pascale AP Giner Vicente V Lecomte Jacques J Lafitte Jean-Jacques JJ Leclercq Nathalie N Paesmans Marianne M Sculier Jean-Paul JP

Frontiers in oncology 20170919

<h4>Introduction</h4>In a literature meta-analysis, we showed survival benefits for regimens including cisplatin [hazard ratio (HR) 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.57-0.66] and for those including etoposide (HR 0.65; 0.61-0.69). That benefit was mainly observed when etoposide alone or in combination with cisplatin was included in the chemotherapy regimens. Our objective was to determine if chemotherapy with both drugs improves survival in comparison to a non-platinum regimen with etoposide ...[more]

PMID: 28975084

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNo novel chemotherapeutic combinations have demonstrated superior efficacy to etoposide/cisplatin (EP), a standard treatment regimen for extensive-stage small cell lung carcinoma (ES-SCLC) over the past decade. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of belotecan/cisplatin (BP) and EP regimens in chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-naïve patients with previously untreated ES-SCLC.MethodsWe conducted a multi-center, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, phase III clinical study. A total of 157 patients were recruited at 14 centers with 147 patients meeting the inclusion/exclusion criteria and randomized to either BP (n = 71) or EP (n = 76) treatment arms. A non-inferior response rate (RR) in the BP arm, analyzed by intent-to-treat analysis according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.0 criteria, was used as the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsIn the BP arm, one patient had a complete response, 41 had a partial response (PR), and 17 had stable disease (SD). In the EP arm, 35 patients had PR and 28 had SD. The RR in the BP arm was non-inferior to the EP regimen in patients with ES-SCLC (BP: 59.2 %, EP: 46.1 %, difference: 13.1 %, 90 % two-sided confidence interval: -0.3-26.5, meeting the predefined non-inferiority criterion of -15.0 %). No significant differences in OS or PFS were observed between the treatment arms. Hematologic toxicities, including grade 3/4 anemia and thrombocytopenia, were significantly more prevalent in the BP arm than the EP arm.ConclusionsThe RR to the BP regimen was non-inferior to the EP regimen in chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-naïve patients with previously untreated ES-SCLC. Hematologic toxicities were significantly more prevalent in the BP group, indicating that BP should be used with care, particularly in patients with a poor performance status. Further studies assessing PFS and OS are required to validate the superiority of the BP regimen.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00826644 . Date of Registration: January 21, 2009.

Project description:ObjectiveLittle observational data exist regarding the use of cisplatin, etoposide, and bleomycin (BEP) chemotherapy regimen in patients with gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN).MethodsThis is a retrospective study of 95 patients with GTN in our center from June/2010 to June/2018. All patients received at least 2 cycles of BEP chemotherapy. The primary outcomes were the rate of complete remission (CR) and overall survival (OS). The secondary outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS), pregnancy rates after BEP exposure, drug resistance rate, and other adverse events.ResultsOf the 95 patients included, 66 (69.5%) patients received BEP as primary treatment and 29 (30.5%) were Salvage chemotherapy. The median age at diagnosis was 37 years (range 29.75-46) and 34 years (range 27-40) in two groups, respectively. The median WHO prognostic scores were 6 (range 3.5-8), and 77.32% of patients were FIGO stage III-IV in the primary treatment group. The median WHO prognostic scores were 5 (range 3-9), and 66.55% of patients were FIGO stage III-IV in the salvage treatment group. Median cycles of BEP treatment were 4 (3, 5) and 3 (2, 4) in two groups, respectively. In the primary chemotherapy group, 18.2% received additional hysterectomy, 4.5% received UAE for vaginal bleeding, and 1.52% received whole-brain radiotherapy. In the salvage chemotherapy group, 20.7% received hysterectomy, 6.9% received lobectomy, 3.4% received hysteroscopic lesion resection, and 3.4% received whole-brain radiotherapy. CR rates to initial chemotherapy were 86.4%, including 87.9% in the primary chemotherapy group and 82.8% in the salvage chemotherapy group. No predictive factor of chemotherapy resistance was identified. The rate of 5 year-DFS was 96.52% (95% CI 86.78-99.12) in the primary chemotherapy group and 92.44% (95% CI 73.02-98.06) in the salvage chemotherapy group. The rate of 5 year-OS was 98.31% (95% CI 88.57-99.76) and 95.65% (95% CI 79.93-99.38) in the two groups, respectively. During the treatment, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, and liver dysfunction occurred in 80.3%, 6.1%, 25.8%, and 50% primary chemotherapy patients and 82.8%, 31%, 10.3%, and 86.2% salvage chemotherapy patients. In patients with fertility requirements, live birth rates were 100% (10/10) in primary chemotherapy patients and 80% (4/5) in salvage chemotherapy patients.ConclusionsBEP regimen was effective in the treatment of GTINs. The treatment was well tolerated, with no safety concerns on patients' fertility.

Project description:PurposeTo compare the efficacy of four cycles of paclitaxel-bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (T-BEP) to four cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) in previously untreated patients with intermediate-prognosis germ-cell cancer (GCC).Patients and methodsPatients were randomly assigned to receive either T-BEP or standard BEP. Patients assigned to the T-BEP group received paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) in a 3-hour infusion. Patients who were administered T-BEP received primary granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis. The study was designed as a randomized open-label phase II/III study. To show a 10% improvement in 3-year progression-free survival (PFS), the study aimed to recruit 498 patients but closed with 337 patients as a result of slow accrual.ResultsAccrual was from November 1998 to April 2009. A total of 169 patients were administered BEP, and 168 patients were administered T-BEP. Thirteen patients in both arms were ineligible, mainly as a result of a good prognosis of GCC (eight patients administered BEP; six patients administered T-BEP) or a poor prognosis of GCC (one patient administered BEP; four patients administered T-BEP). PFS at 3 years (intent to treat) was 79.4% in the T-BEP group versus 71.1% in the BEP group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; CI, 0.47 to 1.13; P [log-rank test] = 0.153). PFS at 3 years in all eligible patients was 82.7% versus 70.1%, respectively (HR, 0.60; CI: 0.37 to 0.97) and was statistically significant (P = 0.03). Overall survival was not statistically different.ConclusionT-BEP administered with G-CSF seems to be a safe and effective treatment regimen for patients with intermediate-prognosis GCC. However, the study recruited a smaller-than-planned number of patients and included 7.7% ineligible patients. The primary analysis of the trial could not demonstrate statistical superiority of T-BEP for PFS. When ineligible patients were excluded, the analysis of all eligible patients demonstrated a 12% superior 3-year PFS with T-BEP, which was statistically significant.

Project description:PurposeVeliparib, a poly (ADP ribose) polymerase inhibitor, potentiated standard chemotherapy against small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) in preclinical studies. We evaluated the combination of veliparib with cisplatin and etoposide (CE; CE+V) doublet in untreated, extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC).Materials and methodsPatients with ES-SCLC, stratified by sex and serum lactate dehydrogenase levels, were randomly assigned to receive four 3-week cycles of CE (75 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 100 mg/m2 on days 1 through 3) along with veliparib (100 mg orally twice per day on days 1 through 7) or placebo (CE+P). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Using an overall one-sided 0.10-level log-rank test, the study had 88% power to demonstrate a 37.5% reduction in the PFS hazard rate.ResultsA total of 128 eligible patients received treatment on protocol. The median age was 66 years, 52% of patients were men, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status was 0 for 29% of patients and 1 for 71%. The respective median PFS for the CE+V arm versus the CE+P arm was 6.1 versus 5.5 months (unstratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [one-sided P = .06]; stratified HR, 0.63 [one-sided P = .01]), favoring CE+V. The median overall survival was 10.3 versus 8.9 months (stratified HR, 0.83; 80% CI, 0.64 to 1.07; one-sided P = .17) for the CE+V and CE+P arms, respectively. The overall response rate was 71.9% versus 65.6% (two-sided P = .57) for CE+V and CE+P, respectively. There was a significant treatment-by-strata interaction in PFS: Male patients with high lactate dehydrogenase levels derived significant benefit (PFS HR, 0.34; 80% CI, 0.22 to 0.51) but there was no evidence of benefit among patients in other strata (PFS HR, 0.81; 80% CI, 0.60 to 1.09). The following grade ≥ 3 hematology toxicities were more frequent in the CE+V arm than the CE+P arm: CD4 lymphopenia (8% v 0%; P = .06) and neutropenia (49% v 32%; P = .08), but treatment delivery was comparable.ConclusionThe addition of veliparib to frontline chemotherapy showed signal of efficacy in patients with ES-SCLC and the study met its prespecified end point.

Dataset Information

A Phase III Randomized Study Comparing a Chemotherapy with Cisplatin and Etoposide to a Etoposide Regimen without Cisplatin for Patients with Extensive Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Publications

A Phase III Randomized Study Comparing a Chemotherapy with Cisplatin and Etoposide to a Etoposide Regimen without Cisplatin for Patients with Extensive Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets