Originally published as JCO Early Release 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.003 on February 14 2005

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 Baka, S. Articles by Thatcher, N. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Baka, S. Articles by Thatcher, N. Related Articles Related Editorial Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Randomized Phase II Study of Two Gemcitabine Schedules for Patients With Impaired Performance Status (Karnofsky performance status 70) and Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

From the Christie Hospital and Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, Princess Royal Hospital, Hull, United Kingdom

Address reprint requests to Sofia Baka, MD, Christie Hospital, Wilmslow Rd, Withington, Manchester M20 4BX, United Kingdom; e-mail: bakasofia{at}hotmail.com

PURPOSE: This randomized phase II study compared two treatment schedules of gemcitabine in patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and impaired Karnofsky performance status (KP). Primary objectives were to record changes from baseline KP and to assess symptom palliation. Secondary objectives were overall survival, tumor response, and toxicity.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIb and IV NSCLC and KP 70 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m² on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle (3w4) or gemcitabine 1,500 mg/m² on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle (2w3), both for up to six cycles. KP, toxicity, and SS14 lung cancer specific questions were recorded before each cycle of treatment. Response was evaluated 4 weeks after the last cycle.

RESULTS: One hundred seventy-four patients were enrolled. There was significant early attrition due to disease progression; only 61.5% of patients were alive at 2 months. There was a significant improvement in KP from baseline to pre–cycle 3 in both arms, with a trend in favor of the 3w4 regimen for duration and faster onset of improvement. Eight of the 17 quality-of-life (QOL) variables assessed showed an improvement of more than 10% between baseline and the start of the third cycle of treatment. Response rate, survival, and duration were similar in both arms.

CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference between the two schedules examined in terms of improvement in KP or QOL, but there seemed to be a trend in favor of the 3w4 schedule.

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found at the end of this article.

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

Related Editorial

• The Frail Are Not Always Elderly
  Matti S. Aapro
  JCO 2005 23: 2121-2122 [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. P. Sculier, J. J. Lafitte, M. Paesmans, J. Lecomte, C. G. Alexopoulos, O. Van Cutsem, V. Giner, A. Efremidis, M. C. Berchier, T. Collon, et al. Chemotherapy improves low performance status lung cancer patients Eur. Respir. J., December 1, 2007; 30(6): 1186 - 1192. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. I. Baka In Reply: J. Clin. Oncol., October 1, 2005; 23(28): 7232 - 7232. [Full Text] [PDF]

				O. Belvedere and F. Grossi To Treat or Not to Treat Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients With Impaired Performance Status? J. Clin. Oncol., October 1, 2005; 23(28): 7231 - 7232. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. S. Aapro The Frail Are Not Always Elderly J. Clin. Oncol., April 1, 2005; 23(10): 2121 - 2122. [Full Text] [PDF]