Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan.
IHA Hematology Oncology, Pontiac, Michigan.
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Oct 3;5(10):e2237699. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.37699.
The current standard of care for the treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is concurrent chemoradiation for patients with limited-stage SCLC (LS-SCLC) and chemoimmunotherapy for extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). The backbone of chemotherapy regimens in both is a platinum-etoposide doublet: cisplatin is traditionally the preferred platinum agent in the curative intent setting, whereas carboplatin is preferred in ES-SCLC because of its favorable toxicity profile.
To determine whether cisplatin is associated with better survival outcomes than carboplatin in treating LS-SCLC and ES-SCLC.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this cohort study, data were compiled from the National Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry for patients with SCLC who received platinum-based multiagent chemotherapy between 2000 and 2020 for ES-SCLC and 2000 and 2021 for LS-SCLC. Only patients with pathologically confirmed cases of LS-SCLC who received concurrent chemoradiation and ES-SCLC who received chemotherapy were included.
The primary end point was overall survival (OS). The secondary end points included OS by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, age, and laterality. Interval-censored Weibull and Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to estimate median OS and hazard ratios (HRs), respectively. Survival curves were compared by a Wald test.
A total of 4408 SCLC cases were studied. Most patients were White (3589 patients [81.4%]), male (4252 [96.5%]), and non-Hispanic (4142 [94.0%]); 2262 patients (51.3%) were 60 to 69 years old, followed by 1476 patients (33.5%) aged 70 years or older, 631 patients (14.3%) aged 50 to 59 years, and 39 patients (0.9%) aged 30 to 49 years. Among 2652 patients with ES-SCLC, 2032 were treated with carboplatin-based therapy and 660 received cisplatin; the median OS was 8.45 months (95% CI, 7.75-9.20 months) for cisplatin and 8.51 months (95% CI, 8.07-8.97 months) for carboplatin (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.91-1.12; P = .90). Subset analysis showed no survival difference between the 2 agents in different age or performance status groups except for patients aged 70 years and older, for whom the median OS was 6.36 months (95% CI, 5.31-7.56 months) for cisplatin and 8.47 months (95% CI, 7.79-9.19 months) for carboplatin (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.96; P = .02). Multivariable analysis of performance status and age did not show a significant difference in survival between the 2 groups (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.83-1.10; P = .54). Of 1756 patients with LS-SCLC, 801 received carboplatin, and 1018 received cisplatin. The median OS was 26.92 months (95% CI, 25.03-28.81 months) for cisplatin and 25.58 months (95% CI, 23.64-27.72 months) for carboplatin (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.94-1.16; P = .46). The median OS was not significantly different between 2 agents according to cancer stage (I-III), performance status, and age groups. A multivariable analysis of factors associated with OS accounting for stage (I-III), performance status, and age did not demonstrate a significant difference in survival between carboplatin and cisplatin in patients with LS-SCLC (HR, 0.995; 95% CI, 0.86-1.15; P = .95).
Cisplatin is not associated with a survival advantage over carboplatin among patients with either ES-SCLC or LS-SCLC, irrespective of performance status and age. The favorable toxicity profile of carboplatin and comparable OS support its use in both LS-SCLC and ES-SCLC in clinical practice and may allow more room for combination with novel treatment strategies in clinical trials.
小细胞肺癌 (SCLC) 的当前标准治疗方法是局限期小细胞肺癌 (LS-SCLC) 的同步放化疗和广泛期小细胞肺癌 (ES-SCLC) 的化疗免疫治疗。这两种疾病的化疗方案的骨干都是铂类依托泊苷二联药物:顺铂传统上是有治愈意图的治疗中首选的铂类药物,而卡铂因其良好的毒性特征而更常用于 ES-SCLC。
确定顺铂在治疗 LS-SCLC 和 ES-SCLC 中的生存结果是否优于卡铂。
设计、设置和参与者:在这项队列研究中,数据来自国家退伍军人事务部中央癌症登记处,纳入了 2000 年至 2020 年期间接受 ES-SCLC 卡铂为基础的多药化疗和 2000 年至 2021 年期间接受 LS-SCLC 顺铂同步放化疗的 LS-SCLC 患者。仅纳入经病理证实的 LS-SCLC 患者和接受同步放化疗的 ES-SCLC 患者。
主要终点是总生存 (OS)。次要终点包括东部肿瘤协作组体力状态、年龄和侧别分层的 OS。间隔删失 Weibull 和 Cox 比例风险回归模型分别用于估计中位 OS 和风险比 (HR)。通过 Wald 检验比较生存曲线。
共研究了 4408 例 SCLC 病例。大多数患者为白人(3589 例 [81.4%])、男性(4252 例 [96.5%])和非西班牙裔(4142 例 [94.0%]);2262 例(51.3%)患者年龄为 60 至 69 岁,其次是年龄为 70 岁或以上的 1476 例患者(33.5%)、年龄为 50 至 59 岁的 631 例患者(14.3%)和年龄为 30 至 49 岁的 39 例患者(0.9%)。在 2652 例 ES-SCLC 患者中,2032 例接受卡铂为基础的治疗,660 例接受顺铂治疗;顺铂组的中位 OS 为 8.45 个月(95%CI,7.75-9.20 个月),卡铂组为 8.51 个月(95%CI,8.07-8.97 个月)(HR,1.01;95%CI,0.91-1.12;P=0.90)。亚组分析显示,除了 70 岁及以上的患者外,两种药物在不同年龄或体力状态组之间的生存无差异,其中顺铂组的中位 OS 为 6.36 个月(95%CI,5.31-7.56 个月),卡铂组为 8.47 个月(95%CI,7.79-9.19 个月)(HR,0.77;95%CI,0.61-0.96;P=0.02)。对体力状态和年龄的多变量分析显示,两组之间的生存无显著差异(HR,0.96;95%CI,0.83-1.10;P=0.54)。在 1756 例 LS-SCLC 患者中,801 例接受卡铂治疗,1018 例接受顺铂治疗。顺铂组的中位 OS 为 26.92 个月(95%CI,25.03-28.81 个月),卡铂组为 25.58 个月(95%CI,23.64-27.72 个月)(HR,1.04;95%CI,0.94-1.16;P=0.46)。根据癌症分期(I-III)、体力状态和年龄组,两种药物的中位 OS 无显著差异。多变量分析显示,考虑到分期(I-III)、体力状态和年龄,LS-SCLC 患者中卡铂和顺铂与生存无关(HR,0.995;95%CI,0.86-1.15;P=0.95)。
在 ES-SCLC 和 LS-SCLC 患者中,顺铂与卡铂相比,无论体力状态和年龄如何,均未显示生存优势。卡铂良好的毒性特征和相当的 OS 支持其在 LS-SCLC 和 ES-SCLC 中的临床应用,并可能为临床试验中与新型治疗策略的联合提供更多空间。