TY - JOUR
T1 - Phase II randomized study of cisplatin plus etoposide phosphate or etoposide in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer
AU - Hainsworth, John D.
AU - Levitan, Nathan
AU - Wampler, Galen L.
AU - Belani, Chandra
AU - Seyedsadr, Mahmoud S.
AU - Randolph, J.
AU - Schacter, Lee P.
AU - Greco, F. Anthony
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2017 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 1995/6
Y1 - 1995/6
N2 - Purpose: This randomized phase II study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of etoposide phosphate when used in combination with cisplatin in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer. Patients and Methods: Patients with previously untreated small-cell lung cancer were randomized to receive cisplatin in combination with either etoposide or etoposide phosphate. Molar- equivalent doses of etoposide and etoposide phosphate were used. Response rate, time to progression, survival, and toxicity were compared. Results: Major response rates with etoposide phosphate and etoposide were 61% (95% confidence interval, 55% to 67%) and 58% (95% confidence interval, 52% to 64%), respectively (P = .85). No significant differences in median time to progression or survival were observed in patients who received etoposide phosphate versus etoposide. Grade 3 and 4 leukopenia occurred in 63% of patients who received etoposide phosphate compared with 77% who received etoposide (P = .16). Conclusion: The combination of etoposide phosphate an cisplatin is effective in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer, and can be administered with acceptable toxicity. Although this study was not designed to be a formal comparative trial, the efficacy and toxicity observed with this regimen were found to be similar to a standard etoposide/cisplatin regimen, using molar-equivalent etoposide doses. Because of its greater ease of administration, etoposide phosphate is preferable to etoposide for routine clinical use.
AB - Purpose: This randomized phase II study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of etoposide phosphate when used in combination with cisplatin in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer. Patients and Methods: Patients with previously untreated small-cell lung cancer were randomized to receive cisplatin in combination with either etoposide or etoposide phosphate. Molar- equivalent doses of etoposide and etoposide phosphate were used. Response rate, time to progression, survival, and toxicity were compared. Results: Major response rates with etoposide phosphate and etoposide were 61% (95% confidence interval, 55% to 67%) and 58% (95% confidence interval, 52% to 64%), respectively (P = .85). No significant differences in median time to progression or survival were observed in patients who received etoposide phosphate versus etoposide. Grade 3 and 4 leukopenia occurred in 63% of patients who received etoposide phosphate compared with 77% who received etoposide (P = .16). Conclusion: The combination of etoposide phosphate an cisplatin is effective in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer, and can be administered with acceptable toxicity. Although this study was not designed to be a formal comparative trial, the efficacy and toxicity observed with this regimen were found to be similar to a standard etoposide/cisplatin regimen, using molar-equivalent etoposide doses. Because of its greater ease of administration, etoposide phosphate is preferable to etoposide for routine clinical use.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029042865&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029042865&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1200/JCO.1995.13.6.1436
DO - 10.1200/JCO.1995.13.6.1436
M3 - Article
C2 - 7751890
AN - SCOPUS:0029042865
SN - 0732-183X
VL - 13
SP - 1436
EP - 1442
JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology
JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology
IS - 6
ER -