Phase II randomized study of cisplatin plus etoposide phosphate or etoposide in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer

John D. Hainsworth, Nathan Levitan, Galen L. Wampler, Chandra Belani, Mahmoud S. Seyedsadr, J. Randolph, Lee P. Schacter, F. Anthony Greco

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1436-1442
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
Volume13
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1995

Fingerprint

Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
Etoposide
Cisplatin
Therapeutics
Confidence Intervals
Survival
etoposide phosphate
Leukopenia

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Oncology
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

Hainsworth, John D. ; Levitan, Nathan ; Wampler, Galen L. ; Belani, Chandra ; Seyedsadr, Mahmoud S. ; Randolph, J. ; Schacter, Lee P. ; Greco, F. Anthony. / Phase II randomized study of cisplatin plus etoposide phosphate or etoposide in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer. In: Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1995 ; Vol. 13, No. 6. pp. 1436-1442.
@article{3c1bbbd8378745249cc07d422f75bb87,
title = "Phase II randomized study of cisplatin plus etoposide phosphate or etoposide in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer",
abstract = "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.",
author = "Hainsworth, {John D.} and Nathan Levitan and Wampler, {Galen L.} and Chandra Belani and Seyedsadr, {Mahmoud S.} and J. Randolph and Schacter, {Lee P.} and Greco, {F. Anthony}",
year = "1995",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1200/JCO.1995.13.6.1436",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "1436--1442",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Oncology",
issn = "0732-183X",
publisher = "American Society of Clinical Oncology",
number = "6",

}

Hainsworth, JD, Levitan, N, Wampler, GL, Belani, C, Seyedsadr, MS, Randolph, J, Schacter, LP & Greco, FA 1995, 'Phase II randomized study of cisplatin plus etoposide phosphate or etoposide in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer', Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 1436-1442. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1995.13.6.1436

Phase II randomized study of cisplatin plus etoposide phosphate or etoposide in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer. / Hainsworth, John D.; Levitan, Nathan; Wampler, Galen L.; Belani, Chandra; Seyedsadr, Mahmoud S.; Randolph, J.; Schacter, Lee P.; Greco, F. Anthony.

In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 13, No. 6, 01.01.1995, p. 1436-1442.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

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

PY - 1995/1/1

Y1 - 1995/1/1

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

VL - 13

SP - 1436

EP - 1442

JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology

JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology

SN - 0732-183X

IS - 6

ER -