This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Murray, N. Articles by Gandara, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Murray, N. Articles by Gandara, D. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Randomized Study of CODE Versus Alternating CAV/EP for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: An Intergroup Study of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group and the Southwest Oncology Group

From the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; and the Southwest Oncology Group, San Antonio, TX.

Address reprint requests to Nevin Murray MD, British Columbia Cancer Agency, 600 West 10th Ave, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V5Z 4E6; email nmurray{at}bccancer.bc.ca

PURPOSE: To determine whether an intensive weekly chemotherapy regimen plus thoracic irradiation is superior to standard chemotherapy in the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ESCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with ESCLC were considered eligible for the study if they were younger than 68 years, had a performance status of 0 to 2, and were free of brain metastases. Patients were randomized to receive cisplatin, vincristine, doxorubicin, and etoposide (CODE) or alternating cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine/etoposide and cisplatin (CAV/EP). Consolidative thoracic irradiation and prophylactic cranial irradiation were given to patients responding to CODE and according to investigator discretion on the CAV/EP arm.

RESULTS: The fidelity of drug delivery on both drug regimens was equal, and more than 70% of all patients received the intended protocol chemotherapy. Although rates of neutropenic fever were similar, nine (8.2%) of 110 patients on the CODE arm died during chemotherapy, whereas one (0.9%) of 109 patients died on the CAV/EP arm. Response rates after chemotherapy were higher (P = .006) with CODE (87%) than with CAV/EP (70%). However, progression-free survival (median of 0.66 years on both arms) and overall survival (median, 0.98 years for CODE and 0.91 years for CAV/EP) were not statistically different.

CONCLUSION: The CODE regimen increased two-fold the received dose-intensity of four of the most active drugs in small-cell lung cancer compared with the standard CAV/EP regimen while maintaining an approximately equal total dose. Despite supportive care (but not routine prophylactic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor), there was excessive toxic mortality with the CODE regimen. The response rate with CODE was higher than that of CAV/EP, but progression-free and overall survival were not significantly improved. In view of increased toxicity and similar efficacy, the CODE chemotherapy regimen is not recommended for treatment of ESCLC.

Presented in part at the 33rd Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, May 17-20, 1997, Denver, CO.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. Crivellari, S. Monfardini, S. Stragliotto, D. Marino, and S. M. L. Aversa Increasing Chemotherapy in Small-Cell Lung Cancer: From Dose Intensity and Density to Megadoses Oncologist, January 1, 2007; 12(1): 79 - 89. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C.-R. Chien and M.-S. Lai Trends in the Pattern of Care for Lung Cancer and Their Correlation With New Clinical Evidence: Experiences in a University-Affiliated Medical Center American Journal of Medical Quality, November 1, 2006; 21(6): 408 - 414. [Abstract] [PDF]

				Y. Iwasaki, K. Nagata, M. Nakanishi, A. Natuhara, Y. Kubota, M. Ueda, T. Arimoto, and H. Hara Double-Cycle, High-Dose Ifosfamide, Carboplatin, and Etoposide Followed by Peripheral Blood Stem-Cell Transplantation for Small Cell Lung Cancer Chest, October 1, 2005; 128(4): 2268 - 2273. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Ohe, S. Negoro, K. Matsui, K. Nakagawa, T. Sugiura, Y. Takada, Y. Nishiwaki, S. Yokota, M. Kawahara, N. Saijo, et al. Phase I-II study of amrubicin and cisplatin in previously untreated patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer Ann. Onc., March 1, 2005; 16(3): 430 - 436. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Singh, W. Parulekar, N. Murray, R. Feld, W. K. Evans, D. Tu, and F. A. Shepherd Influence of Sex on Toxicity and Treatment Outcome in Small-Cell Lung Cancer J. Clin. Oncol., February 1, 2005; 23(4): 850 - 856. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Sekine, Y. Nishiwaki, K. Noda, S. Kudoh, M. Fukuoka, K. Mori, S. Negoro, A. Yokoyama, K. Matsui, Y. Ohsaki, et al. Randomized phase II study of cisplatin, irinotecan and etoposide combinations administered weekly or every 4 weeks for extensive small-cell lung cancer (JCOG9902-DI) Ann. Onc., May 1, 2003; 14(5): 709 - 714. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. A. Masters, L. Declerck, C. Blanke, A. Sandler, R. DeVore, K. Miller, and D. Johnson Phase II Trial of Gemcitabine in Refractory or Relapsed Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial 1597 J. Clin. Oncol., April 15, 2003; 21(8): 1550 - 1555. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Mounier, C. Ferme, H. Flechtner, M. M. Henry-Amar, and E. Lepage Model-Based Methodology for Analyzing Incomplete Quality-of-Life Data and Integrating Them into the Q-Twist Framework Med Decis Making, January 1, 2003; 23(1): 54 - 66. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. G. Spiro and J. C. Porter Lung Cancer--Where Are We Today?: Current Advances in Staging and Nonsurgical Treatment Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., November 1, 2002; 166(9): 1166 - 1196. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. H. Hanna, A. B. Sandler, P. J. Loehrer Sr, R. Ansari, S. H. Jung, K. Lane, and L. H. Einhorn Maintenance daily oral etoposide versus no further therapy following induction chemotherapy with etoposide plus ifosfamide plus cisplatin in extensive small-cell lung cancer: a Hoosier Oncology Group randomized study Ann. Onc., January 19, 2002; 13(1): 95 - 102. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Osterlind Chemotherapy in small cell lung cancer Eur. Respir. J., December 1, 2001; 18(6): 1026 - 1043. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Kelly, L. Lovato, P. A. Bunn Jr., R. B. Livingston, J. Zangmeister, S. A. Taylor, D. Roychowdhury, J. J. Crowley, and D. R. Gandara Cisplatin, Etoposide, and Paclitaxel with Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor in Untreated Patients with Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase II Trial of the Southwest Oncology Group Clin. Cancer Res., August 1, 2001; 7(8): 2325 - 2329. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-L. Pujol, J.-P. Daures, A. Riviere, E. Quoix, V. Westeel, X. Quantin, J.-L. Breton, E. Lemarie, M. Poudenx, B. Milleron, et al. Etoposide Plus Cisplatin With or Without the Combination of 4'-Epidoxorubicin Plus Cyclophosphamide in Treatment of Extensive Small-Cell Lung Cancer: a French Federation of Cancer Institutes Multicenter Phase III Randomized Study J Natl Cancer Inst, February 21, 2001; 93(4): 300 - 308. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. J. Woll, N. Thatcher, L. Lomax, J. Hodgetts, S. M. Lee, P. A. Burt, R. Stout, T. Simms, R. Davies, and R. Pettengell Use of Hematopoietic Progenitors in Whole Blood to Support Dose-Dense Chemotherapy: A Randomized Phase II Trial in Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients J. Clin. Oncol., February 1, 2001; 19(3): 712 - 719. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. H. Johnson and D. P. Carbone Increased Dose-Intensity in Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Failed Strategy? J. Clin. Oncol., August 1, 1999; 17(8): 2297 - 2297. [Full Text] [PDF]