Phase III study comparing sequential versus alternate administration of cisplatin-etoposide and topotecan as first-line treatment in small cell lung cancer.

AIM

To compare the efficacy and tolerance of sequential versus alternate front-line administration of cisplatin-etoposide (PE) and topotecan (T) in patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were randomized to receive either 4 cycles PE (cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1 and etoposide100 mg/m(2)/d i.v. days 1-3 every 21 days) followed by 4 cycles T (1.5 mg/m(2)/d i.v. days 1-5 every 21 days) (arm A, 183 patients) or the same regimens using an alternate sequence (arm B, 181 patients).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in terms of compliance with treatment, overall response rates (51.4% vs. 55.2%; p=0.458), median response duration (4.3 vs. 5.2 months; p=0.780), median time to tumour progression (5.7 vs. 6.4 months; p=0.494), median overall survival (10.9 vs. 9.8 months; p=0.186) and 1-year survival (43.8% vs. 36.5%) between the two arms. The incidence of severe grade 3-4 haematological and grade 2-4 non-haematological (asthenia, mucositis, diarrhoea and neurotoxicity) toxicity was comparable between the two arms.

CONCLUSION

The comparison of sequential versus alternate administration of cisplatin-etoposide and topotecan as front-line treatment of patients with extensive stage SCLC revealed no clinically meaningful differences in terms of efficacy and tolerance.