Advertisement
Journal of Clinical Oncology  
Search for:
Limit by:
  Browse by Subject or Issue
Home Search or Browse JCO My JCO Subscriptions Customer Service Site Map

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRights & Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wolf, M.
Right arrow Articles by Mende, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wolf, M.
Right arrow Articles by Mende, S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 5, 1880-1889, Copyright © 1987 by American Society of Clinical Oncology


ARTICLES

Cisplatin/etoposide versus ifosfamide/etoposide combination chemotherapy in small-cell lung cancer: a multicenter German randomized trial

M Wolf, K Havemann, R Holle, C Gropp, P Drings, K Hans, M Schroeder, M Heim, M Dommes and S Mende
Department of Internal Medicine, Philipps-University of Marburg, Federal Republic of Germany.

A total of 144 patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) were randomized to receive cisplatin/etoposide (PE) or ifosfamide/etoposide (IE) combination chemotherapy. PE consisted of cisplatin, 80 mg/m2, intravenously (IV) on day 1, and etoposide, 150 mg/m2, IV on days 3 through 5. IE consisted of ifosfamide, 1,500 mg/m2, IV on days 1 through 5, and etoposide, 120 mg/m2, IV on days 3 through 5. Six cycles were administered in 3-week intervals. Nonresponders were switched immediately to CAV, consisting of cyclophosphamide, 600 mg/m2, IV on days 1 and 2, Adriamycin (Adria Laboratories, Columbus, OH), 50 mg/m2, IV on day 1, and vincristine, 2 mg, IV on day 1. Patients obtaining complete remission (CR) received prophylactic cranial irradiation with 30 Gy. After completion of chemotherapy, patients with limited disease received chest irradiation with 45 Gy. No maintenance therapy was given to patients in CR. Minimum follow-up was 2 years. Of the 141 patients evaluable, the overall response rate was 65% in PE therapy and 68% in IE therapy. The CR rate was 32% v 20% for all patients, 50% v 24% for limited disease, and 22% v 18% for extensive disease, all in favor of PE therapy. Median survival for all patients was 11.6 months v 9.4 months, for limited disease 14.8 months v 11.0 months, and for extensive disease 8.9 months v 7.5 months, all preferring PE therapy. The 2-year survival rate was higher in PE therapy than in IE therapy for all patients (12% v 9%) and for limited disease (23% v 10%), but not for extensive disease (5% v 9%). Median progression-free survival was 7.5 months v 6.0 months for all patients, 12.2 months v 8.8 months for limited disease, and 5.9 months v 4.4 months for extensive disease, all in favor of PE. Relapse in the area of the primary tumor was found less often after PE than after IE therapy (25% v 38%). Response to second-line CAV was seen in 30% of patients with prior PE and 43% with prior IE therapy, but was usually short lasting, and only one patient achieved CR. Toxicity included three lethal complications. Nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and skin lesions occurred more often after PE than after IE therapy. These results suggest that PE is superior to IE chemotherapy in limited-stage, but not in extensive-stage SCLC, and that CAV is cross-resistant to PE, as well as to IE in the majority of patients.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
U Seifart, T Fink, C Schade-Brittinger, K Hans, C Mueller, G Koschel, H Schroeder, R Lorenz, J Dethling, and M Wolf
Randomised phase II study comparing topotecan/carboplatin administration for 5 versus 3 days in the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer
Ann. Onc., January 1, 2007; 18(1): 104 - 109.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
A. Schmittel, L. F. von Weikersthal, M. Sebastian, P. Martus, K. Schulze, P. Hortig, M. Reeb, E. Thiel, and U. Keilholz
A randomized phase II trial of irinotecan plus carboplatin versus etoposide plus carboplatin treatment in patients with extended disease small-cell lung cancer
Ann. Onc., April 1, 2006; 17(4): 663 - 667.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
M. Reck, J. von Pawel, H.-N. Macha, E. Kaukel, K.-M. Deppermann, R. Bonnet, K. Ulm, S. Hessler, and U. Gatzemeier
Randomized Phase III Trial of Paclitaxel, Etoposide, and Carboplatin Versus Carboplatin, Etoposide, and Vincristine in Patients With Small-Cell Lung Cancer
J Natl Cancer Inst, August 6, 2003; 95(15): 1118 - 1127.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
F. Nemati, A. Livartowski, P. De Cremoux, Y. Bourgeois, F. Arvelo, P. Pouillart, and M.-F. Poupon
Distinctive Potentiating Effects of Cisplatin and/or Ifosfamide Combined with Etoposide in Human Small Cell Lung Carcinoma Xenografts
Clin. Cancer Res., May 1, 2000; 6(5): 2075 - 2086.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



About
JCO
 Editorial
Roster
 Advertising
Information
 Librarians &
Institutions
 Rights &
Permissions
 PDA Services

Copyright © 1987 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
Terms and Conditions of Use
  HighWire Press HighWire Press™ assists in the publication of JCO Online