Randomized phase III trial of amrubicin/cisplatin versus etoposide/cisplatin as first-line treatment for extensive small-cell lung cancer
Open Access
- 9 April 2016
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Cancer
- Vol. 16 (1) , 1-8
Abstract
Extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC) is characterized by rapid progression and relapse, despite high initial response rates to chemotherapy. The primary objective of this trial was to demonstrate the non-inferiority of amrubicin and cisplatin (AP) combination therapy compared with the standard first-line regimen of etoposide and cisplatin (EP) for previously untreated ED-SCLC in a Chinese population. When non-inferiority was verified, the objective was switched from non-inferiority to superiority. From June 2008 to July 2010, 300 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to AP and EP groups. AP-treated patients received cisplatin (60 mg/m2, day 1) and amrubicin (40 mg/m2, days 1–3) once every 21 days. EP-treated patients received cisplatin (80 mg/m2, day 1) and etoposide (100 mg/m2, days 1–3) once every 21 days. Treatment was continued for four to six cycles, except in cases of progressive disease or toxicity, and patient refusal. Median overall survival (OS) for AP vs. EP treatment was 11.8 vs. 10.3 months (p = 0.08), respectively, demonstrating non-inferiority of AP to EP (AP group: 95 % confidence interval for hazard ratio 0.63–1.03 months). Median progression-free survival and overall response rates for AP vs. EP groups were 6.8 vs. 5.7 months (p = 0.35) and 69.8 % vs. 57.3 %, respectively. Drug-related adverse events in both groups were similar, with neutropenia being the most frequent (AP 54.4 %; EP 44.0 %). Leukopenia, pyrexia, and fatigue were more prevalent in the AP group, but all were clinically reversible and manageable. AP therapy demonstrated non-inferiority to EP therapy, prolonging OS for 1.5 months, but this difference was not statistically significant; thus we propose AP as a promising treatment option for ED-SCLC in China. This trial was registered on 10 April 2008 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00660504 ).Keywords
This publication has 29 references indexed in Scilit:
- Treatment-Related Death in Patients with Small-Cell Lung Cancer in Phase III Trials over the Last Two DecadesPLOS ONE, 2012
- A German multicenter, randomized phase III trial comparing irinotecan–carboplatin with etoposide–carboplatin as first-line therapy for extensive-disease small-cell lung cancerAnnals of Oncology, 2011
- Phase II Study of Sequential Triplet Chemotherapy, Irinotecan and Cisplatin Followed by Amrubicin, in Patients with Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: West Japan Thoracic Oncology Group Study 0301Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 2010
- A multicenter international randomized phase III study comparing cisplatin in combination with irinotecan or etoposide in previously untreated small-cell lung cancer patients with extensive diseaseAnnals of Oncology, 2010
- Phase III Trial of Irinotecan/Cisplatin Compared With Etoposide/Cisplatin in Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Clinical and Pharmacogenomic Results From SWOG S0124Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2009
- Comparison of gemcitabine and carboplatin versus cisplatin and etoposide for patients with poor-prognosis small cell lung cancerThorax, 2008
- Irinotecan Plus Carboplatin Versus Oral Etoposide Plus Carboplatin in Extensive Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized Phase III TrialJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2008
- Phase II study of amrubicin in previously untreated patients with extensive-disease small cell lung cancer: West Japan Thoracic Oncology Group (WJTOG) studyInvestigational New Drugs, 2006
- Phase I–II study of amrubicin and cisplatin in previously untreated patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancerAnnals of Oncology, 2005
- A systematic review of the role of etoposide and cisplatin in the chemotherapy of small cell lung cancer with methodology assessment and meta-analysisLung Cancer, 2000