Chen Yuh-Min, Perng Reury-Perng, Shih Jen-Fu, Tsai Chun-Ming, Whang-Peng Jacqueline
Chest Department, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taiwan.
Lung Cancer. 2007 Jun;56(3):363-9. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2007.01.011. Epub 2007 Feb 15.
Cisplatin plus a third-generation anti-cancer drug, such as vinorelbine, gemcitabine, or the taxanes, are the standard regimen used in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and there is no significant difference in efficacy among the different regimens. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of docetaxel plus cisplatin (DC) versus vinorelbine plus cisplatin (VC) in chemo-naïve NSCLC patients. From December 2003 to May 2005, 94 patients were enrolled. The treatment dose was D 60 mg/m2 and C 60 mg/m2 intravenous infusion (IV) on day 1, or V 25 mg/m2 IV on days 1 and 8, and C 60 mg/m2 IV on day 1, every 3 weeks. In all, 209 cycles of DC and 230 cycles of VC were given to the patients in the DC (median five cycles) and VC (median five cycles) arms, respectively. There were 19 partial responses and one complete response (overall 43.5%) in the DC arm, and no complete responses, but 22 partial responses (overall 45.8%), in the VC arm. Myelosuppression was the major toxicity occurring in both arms, with grades 3 or 4 neutropenia occurring in 72.9% and 71.7% of patients, respectively. Except for alopecia (p=0.005) and diarrhea (p<0.001), which were more common in the DC arm, no significant differences in toxicity profiles were found between the two treatment arms. The median time to disease progression was 4.7 months in the DC arm and 6.3 months in the VC arm (p=0.7355). Median survival time was 13 months in the DC arm and 13.8 months in the VC arm (p=0.9656). The 1-year survival rate was 55.5% and 51.7%, respectively. After treatment, the Lung Cancer Symptom Scales showed no significant difference between the two treatment arms. We concluded that both DC and VC are appropriate regimens for use in the first-line treatment of Chinese NSCLC patients. Asthenia, one of the major side effects of docetaxel, was not a major problem in the present study. Although both regimens produced a high incidence of severe neutropenia, the majority of patients recovered rapidly without sequelae; and VC treatment is still a standard chemotherapy for Chinese NSCLC patients in Taiwan.
顺铂联合第三代抗癌药物,如长春瑞滨、吉西他滨或紫杉烷类药物,是晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)一线治疗的标准方案,不同方案之间的疗效无显著差异。我们的目的是评估多西他赛联合顺铂(DC)与长春瑞滨联合顺铂(VC)在初治NSCLC患者中的疗效。2003年12月至2005年5月,共纳入94例患者。治疗剂量为第1天静脉输注(IV)多西他赛60mg/m²和顺铂60mg/m²,或第1天和第8天静脉输注长春瑞滨25mg/m²,第1天静脉输注顺铂60mg/m²,每3周重复一次。DC组和VC组分别给予患者209个周期的DC方案和230个周期的VC方案(DC组中位5个周期,VC组中位5个周期)。DC组有19例部分缓解和1例完全缓解(总缓解率43.5%),VC组无完全缓解,但有22例部分缓解(总缓解率45.8%)。骨髓抑制是两组主要的毒性反应,3/4级中性粒细胞减少分别发生在72.9%和71.7%的患者中。除脱发(p=0.005)和腹泻(p<0.001)在DC组更常见外,两组治疗的毒性反应无显著差异。DC组疾病进展的中位时间为4.7个月,VC组为6.3个月(p=0.7355)。DC组中位生存时间为13个月,VC组为13.8个月(p=0.9656)。1年生存率分别为55.5%和51.7%。治疗后,肺癌症状量表显示两组之间无显著差异。我们得出结论,DC和VC方案均适用于中国NSCLC患者的一线治疗。多西他赛的主要副作用之一乏力在本研究中并非主要问题。虽然两种方案均导致严重中性粒细胞减少的发生率较高,但大多数患者恢复迅速且无后遗症;对于中国台湾地区的NSCLC患者,VC治疗仍是标准的化疗方案。