Article

Systematic review evaluating the timing of thoracic radiation therapy in combined modality therapy for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer

Multidisciplinary Thoracic Oncology Program, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 17.88). 01/2005; 22(23):4837-45. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2004.01.178
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We employed meta-analytic techniques to evaluate early (E) versus late (L) timing of thoracic radiation therapy (RT) in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC). In addition, we assessed the impact of radiation fractionation and chemotherapeutic regimen on timing.
Randomized trials published after 1985 addressing timing of RT relative to chemotherapy in LS-SCLC were included. Trials were analyzed by risk ratio (RR), risk difference, and number-needed-to-treat methods.
Overall survival (OS) RRs for all studies were 1.17 at 2 years (95% CI, 1.02 to 1.35; P = .03) and 1.13 at 3 years (95% CI, 0.92 to 1.39; P = .2), indicating a significantly increased 2-year survival for ERT versus LRT patients and suggestive of a similar trend at 3 years. Subset analysis of studies using hyperfractionated RT revealed OS RR for ERT versus LRT of 1.44 (95% CI, 1.17 to 1.77; P = .001) and 1.39 (95% CI, 1.02 to 1.90; P = .04) at 2 and 3 years, respectively, indicating a survival benefit of ERT versus LRT. Studies using once-daily fractionation showed no difference in 2- and 3-year OS RRs for ERT compared with LRT. Studies using platinum-based chemotherapy had OS RRs of 1.30 (95% CI, 1.10 to 1.53; P = .002) and 1.35 (95% CI, 1.07 to 1.70; P = .01) at 2 and 3 years, respectively, favoring ERT. Studies using nonplatinum-based chemotherapy regimens had nonsignificant differences in OS.
A small but significant improvement in 2-year OS for ERT versus LRT in LS-SCLC was observed, similar to the benefit of adding RT to chemotherapy or prophylactic cranial irradiation. A greater difference was evident for hyperfractionated RT and platinum-based chemotherapy.

0 Followers
 · 
74 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) remains a significant challenge for the oncologists. Attemps to improve the results of first-line treatment have all failed so far and no real progress has been made in last years, emphasizing the need for novel strategies of treatment and the development of validated biomarkers. Patients with limited disease and good performance status should be considered for concomitant chemoradiotherapy, followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation. Patients with extensive disease should be treated with a platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin or carboplatin); chest radiotherapy can be considered in patients achieving extra-thoracic complete response and prophylactic cranial irradiation is recommended for patients responsive to initial chemotherapy. A large number of molecular-targeted drugs and immunomodulators are currently in clinical development: however, only a better understanding of molecular biology of SCLC and the identification of molecular markers predictive of response to targeted agents will lead to advances in the treatment of SCLC.
    Critical reviews in oncology/hematology 09/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2014.03.003 · 4.05 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Lung Diseases - Selected State of the Art Reviews, 03/2012; , ISBN: 978-953-51-0180-2
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This randomised trial compared platinum-based to anthracycline-based chemotherapy in patients with small-cell lung cancer (limited or extensive stage) and <or=2 adverse prognostic factors. Patients were randomised to receive six cycles of either ACE (doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2) i.v., cyclophosphamide 1 g/m(2) i.v. and etoposide 120 mg/m(2) i.v. on day 1, then etoposide 240 mg/m(2) orally for 2 days) or PE (cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) and etoposide 120 mg/m(2) i.v. on day 1, then etoposide 240 mg/m(2) orally for 2 days) given for every 3 weeks. For patients where cisplatin was not suitable, carboplatin (AUC6) was substituted. A total of 280 patients were included (139 ACE, 141 PE). The response rates were 72% for ACE and 77% for PE. One-year survival rates were 34 and 38% (P=0.497), respectively and 2-year survival was the same (12%) for both arms. For LD patients, the median survival was 10.9 months for ACE and 12.6 months for PE (P=0.51); for ED patients median survival was 8.3 months and 7.5 months, respectively. More grades 3 and 4 neutropenia (90 vs 57%, P<0.005) and grades 3 and 4 infections (73 vs 29%, P<0.005) occurred with ACE, resulting in more days of hospitalisation and greater i.v. antibiotic use. ACE was associated with a higher risk of neutropenic sepsis than PE and with a trend towards worse outcome in patients with LD, and should not be studied further in this group of patients.
    British Journal of Cancer 09/2008; 99(3):442-7. DOI:10.1038/sj.bjc.6604480 · 4.82 Impact Factor