Cisplatin-VP16 alternating with cyclophosphamide-epirubicin versus cyclophosphamide-epirubicin-vincristine in small cell lung cancer

Platinum versus non-platinum chemotherapy regimens for small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a very fast growing form of cancer and is characterised by early metastasis. As a result, chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment. A number of different platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and non-platinum-based chemotherapy regimens have been used for the treatment of SCLC, with varying results. This review was conducted to analyse the data from these studies in order to compare their effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of platinum chemotherapy regimens compared with non-platinum chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of SCLC with respect to survival, tumour response, toxicity and quality of life.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the biomedical literature databases CENTRAL (TheCochrane Library 2014, Issue 7), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL from 1966 to August 2014. In addition, we handsearched reference lists from relevant resources.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials involving patients with pathologically confirmed SCLC (including both limited-stage disease and extensive-stage disease) and the use of a platinum-based chemotherapy regimen in at least one treatment arm and a non-platinum-based chemotherapy regimen in a separate arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. Two authors independently assessed search results. We assessed included studies for methodological quality and recorded the following outcome data: survival, tumour response, toxicity and quality of life. We combined the results of the survival, tumour response and toxicity data in a meta-analysis. Quality-of-life data were analysed individually.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 32 studies involving 6075 patients with SCLC were included in this systematic review. The majority of studies were multi-centre randomised controlled trials conducted throughout Europe, North America and Asia with the earliest study publishing data in 1981 and the latest in 2014. The duration of studies ranged from 12 to 72 months with a median of 32 months. The median age of patients in the vast majority of studies was between 60 and 65 years of age. Eighteen studies presented data on extensive-stage disease. Nine studies presented data on limited-stage disease. Eleven studies did not present data based on the disease stage. These data were analysed separately in subgroup analyses. Sixteen (50%) studies were of good quality with a low risk of bias and the data from these studies were analysed separately in a heterogeneity analysis.There was no statistically significant difference between treatment groups in terms of survival at 6 months, 12 months and 24 months. There was also no statistically significant difference in terms of overall tumour response. However, platinum-based treatment regimens did have a significantly higher rate of complete response. Platinum-based chemotherapy regimens had significantly higher rates of nausea and vomiting and thrombocytopenia toxicity. Four trials presented quality-of-life data, but, due to the different systems used to measure quality of life this data could not be combined in a meta-analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Platinum-based chemotherapy regimens did not offer a statistically significant benefit in survival or overall tumour response compared with non-platinum-based regimens. However, platinum-based chemotherapy regimens did increase complete response rates, at the cost of higher adverse events including nausea and vomiting, anaemia and thrombocytopenia toxicity. These data suggest non-platinum chemotherapy regimens have a more advantageous risk-benefit profile. This systematic review highlights the lack of quality-of-life data in trials involving chemotherapy treatment for SCLC. With poor long-term survival associated with both treatment groups, the issue of the quality of the survival period takes on even more significance. It would be beneficial for future trials in this area to include a quality-of-life assessment.

Platinum versus non-platinum chemotherapy regimens for small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a very fast growing form of cancer and is characterised by early metastasis. As a result, chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment. A number of different platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and non-platinum-based chemotherapy regimens have been used for the treatment of SCLC, with varying results. This review was conducted to analyse the data from these trials in order to compare their effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of platinum chemotherapy regimens compared with non-platinum chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of SCLC with respect to survival, tumour response, toxicity and quality of life.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the biomedical literature databases CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL from 1966 to April 2007. In addition, we handsearched reference lists from relevant resources.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials involving patients with pathologically confirmed (cytological or histological) SCLC and the use of a platinum-based chemotherapy regimen in at least one treatment arm and a non-platinum-based chemotherapy regimen in a separate arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed search results. We assessed included studies for methodological quality and recorded the following outcome data: survival, tumour response, toxicity and quality of life. We combined the results of the survival, tumour response and toxicity data in a meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 29 trials involving 5530 patients were included in this systematic review. There was no statistically significant difference between treatment groups in terms of survival at 6 months, 12 months and 24 months. There was also no statistically significant difference in terms of overall tumour response. However, platinum-based treatment regimens did have a significantly higher rate of complete response. Platinum-based chemotherapy regimens had significantly higher rates of nausea and vomiting, anaemia and thrombocytopenia toxicity. Three trials presented quality of life data but the data presented were not complete and therefore could not be combined in a meta-analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Platinum-based chemotherapy regimens did not offer a statistically significant benefit in survival or overall tumour response compared with non-platinum-based regimens. However, platinum-based chemotherapy regimens did increase complete response rates, at the cost of higher adverse events including nausea and vomiting, anaemia and thrombocytopenia toxicity. These data suggest non-platinum chemotherapy regimens have a more advantageous risk-benefit profile. This systematic review highlights the lack of quality of life data in trials involving chemotherapy treatment for SCLC. With poor long-term survival associated with both treatment groups, the issue of the quality of the survival period takes on even more significance. It would be beneficial for future trials in this area to include a quality of life assessment.

A systematic review of the role of etoposide and cisplatin in the chemotherapy of small cell lung cancer with methodology assessment and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Cisplatin (CDDP) and etoposide (VP16) are considered major standard cytotoxic drugs for small cell lung cancer (SCLC). The present systematic review had as its objective the evaluation of their role, as components of chemotherapy regimens, on survival.

METHODS

Published randomised clinical trials (from 1980 to 1998) were selected comparing, in SCLC patients, chemotherapy regimens, given as first-line therapy. One arm (the experimental arm) had to include CDDP and/or VP16, while another had to omit the same drug(s). Trials quality was assessed by two published scores (Chalmers and European Lung Cancer Working Party (ELCWP)). For each individual trial, the hazard ratio (HR) of the survival distributions was estimated on the basis of reported statistics or, if not available, by extracting, from the survival graphical representations, the data required to construct the difference between expected and observed numbers of events as calculated in the log-rank statistic. A combined hazard ratio was obtained by the Peto method (a value < 1 meaning a benefit for CDDP and/or VP16).

RESULTS

Thirty-six trials eligible for our systematic review were identified, classified into four groups (I-IV): group I, 1 trial testing a CDDP-based regimen (without VP16) against another arm not including either CDDP or VP16; group II, 17 trials testing a VP16-based regimen (without CDDP) against a regimen without VP16 and CDDP; group III, nine trials comparing a regimen including CDDP and VP16 with a regimen using neither drug; and, finally, group IV, nine trials comparing a regimen based on both drugs with a regimen based on VP16 only. Overall, Chalmers and ELCWP scores correlated well (r(S) = 0.76, P < 0. 001) and had respective median scores of 50.3 and 63.7%. The number of eligible patients did not have a significant impact on the scores as well as the trials group, the trial positivity (a positive trial defined as showing itself a statistically significant survival benefit for the experimental regimen), overall or in categories, and the year of publication. Combined hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals were: 0.70 (0.41-1.21) for group I, 0.72 (0.67-0.78) for II, 0.57 (0.51-0.64) for III, and 0.74 (0.66-0.83) for IV, showing a survival benefit in favour of regimens including etoposide alone or in combination with cisplatin, justifying with high significance levels the use of each of these drugs. Overall survival benefits could also be shown for regimens including CDDP (HR = 0.61; confidence interval (CI), 0.57-0.66), as well as for those including VP16 (HR = 0. 65; CI, 0.61-0.69). Robustness of these results has to be confirmed with appropriate randomised trials.

Is there a case for cisplatin in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer? A meta-analysis of randomized trials of a cisplatin-containing regimen versus a regimen without this alkylating agent

Chemotherapy is the backbone of small-cell lung cancer therapy. However, optimal drug combinations and schedules remain to be defined and there is hitherto no world-wide accepted standard regimen. Cisplatin, an alkylating agent with high putative toxicity is currently widely used although its effectiveness in this disease has not been established firmly. We conducted a meta-analysis of published data reporting trials randomizing a cisplatin-containing regimen versus a regimen without this alkylating agent in order to determine possible differences in survival response and toxicity. Nineteen trials have been identified in medical literature (4054 evaluable patients). Ten trials randomized patients to receive a cisplatin-etoposide regimen versus a regimen without any of these two drugs. A subgroup analysis was, therefore, carried out in the nine remaining trials that randomly allocated patients between two regimens differing in the absence or presence of cisplatin, whereas etoposide was given (or not given) in both arms (1579 evaluable patients). The DerSimonian and Laird method was used to estimate the size effects and the Peto and Yusuf method was used in order to generate the odds ratios (OR) of reduction in risk of death and the increase in probability of being responders to chemotherapy. There was no significant difference between the cisplatin-containing regimen and the regimen without this drug when the risk of toxic-death was taken into account with respective probabilities of 3.1 and 2.7% (NS). Patients randomized in a cisplatin-containing regimen had an increase in probability of being responders with an OR of 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.18-1.55; P < 10(-5) corresponding to an increase of objective (partial plus complete) response rate from 0.62 to 0.69 (a result taking into account a significant heterogeneity). Patients treated with a cisplatin-containing regimen benefited from a significant reduction of risk of death at 6 months and 1 year with respective OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75-0.98, P = 0.03, and or 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.93, P = 0.002 (no statistical heterogeneity). This corresponded to a significant increase in the probability of survival of 2.6% and 4.4% at 6 months and 1 year respectively. The meta-analysis restricted to the subset of nine trials without etoposide treatment imbalance reached similar conclusions. A cisplatin-containing regimen yields a higher response rate and probability of survival than does a chemotherapy containing others alkylating agents without a perceptible increase in risk of toxic-death.

Standard combination versus alternating chemotherapy in small cell lung cancer: a randomised clinical trial including 394 patients. 'Petites Cellules' Group

PURPOSE

to compare standard and alternating administration of chemotherapy combinations in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

in a multicenter clinical trial, 394 previously untreated SCLC patients were randomised to receive, every 4 weeks, eight courses of either a standard regimen with CCNU, cyclophosphamide, adriamycin (CCA) and VP16 or an alternating regimen (CCA regimen alternating with cisplatin-vindesine-VP16).

RESULTS

overall response rate was higher in the standard group (78%) than in the alternating group (64%) (P = 0.0001). Complete response rate was also higher in the standard group (32%) than in the alternating group (18%) (P = 0.004). The median survival in the overall SCLC population was 306 days in the standard group and 272 days in the alternating group (P = 0.08). In limited SCLC patients, median survival was higher in the standard group (421 days) than in the alternating group (328 days) (P = 0.01). Grade III/IV haematological toxicity was lower in patients in the alternating group (25 versus 47%) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

the standard regimen was better than the alternating regimen for patients with limited forms of SCLC. The alternating regimen, associated with better haematological safety and ensuring a fairly similar survival, may be considered in patients with extensive SCLC. Pleiomorphic resistance mechanisms to chemotherapy make it difficult to define a non-cross-resistant chemotherapy regimen.