Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Ann Oncol. 2013 Aug;24(8):2088-92. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdt140. Epub 2013 Apr 16.
We compared late thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) with early TRT in the treatment of limited-disease small-cell lung cancer (LD-SCLC).
Patients with LD-SCLC received four cycles of etoposide plus cisplatin every 21 days. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either TRT administered concurrently with the first cycle (early TRT) or the third cycle (late TRT) of chemotherapy. The primary end point was complete response rate.
Two hundred twenty-two patients were randomly assigned.Late TRT was not inferior to early TRT in terms of the complete response rate (early v late; 36.0% v 38.0%). Other efficacy measures including overall survival [median, 24.1 v 26.8 months;hazard ratio (HR) 0.93; 95% CI = 0.67–1.29] and progression free survival (median, 12.4 v 11.2 months; HR 1.09; 95%CI = 0.80–1.48) were not different between two arms. No statistical difference was noted in the pattern of treatment failures.However, neutropenic fever occurred more commonly in the early TRT arm than the late TRT arm (21.6% v 10.2%; P = 0.02) [corrected].
In LD-SCLC treatment, TRT starting in the third cycle of chemotherapy seemed to be noninferior to early TRT, and had a more favorable profile with regard to neutropenic fever.
我们比较了局限期小细胞肺癌(LD-SCLC)患者接受晚期与早期胸部放疗(TRT)的疗效。
LD-SCLC 患者接受 4 个周期依托泊苷+顺铂治疗,每 21 天 1 次。患者随机分为接受早期 TRT(化疗第 1 周期同期)或晚期 TRT(化疗第 3 周期)。主要终点为完全缓解率。
222 例患者随机分组。晚期 TRT 组与早期 TRT 组的完全缓解率(早期 v 晚期;36.0% v 38.0%)无显著差异。其他疗效指标,包括总生存(中位 24.1 与 26.8 个月;HR 0.93;95%CI=0.67–1.29)和无进展生存(中位 12.4 与 11.2 个月;HR 1.09;95%CI=0.80–1.48),两组也无显著差异。两组治疗失败模式无统计学差异。然而,早期 TRT 组较晚期 TRT 组更常发生中性粒细胞减少性发热(21.6% v 10.2%;P=0.02)。
在 LD-SCLC 治疗中,第 3 周期开始的 TRT 似乎并不劣于早期 TRT,且在中性粒细胞减少性发热方面具有更好的特征。