Comparison of cisplatin-paclitaxel combination versus cisplatin-etoposide in patients with small-cell lung cancer: a Phase III study

Abstract

Cisplatin-paclitaxel and cisplatin-etoposide combination therapies were compared in limited and extensive disease in patients with small-cell lung cancer. The primary objectives were to determine median and overall survival, time to tumor progression and tolerance and the secondary objective, the response rate. From January 2003 till July 2007, 108 patients were enrolled in the study. All patients had histologically- or cytologically-confirmed small-cell lung cancer. All patients were chemotherapy and radiotherapy naive. The patients were designated to receive six cycles: in the investigational Arm A, cisplatin, 80 mg/m(2) and paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) were infused on day 1 (1 cycle) and repeated every 3 weeks. In the control Arm B, cisplatin, 80 mg/m(2) was administered on day 1 and etoposide, 120 mg/m(2) per day was given on days 1-3 (1 cycle), every 3 weeks. In Arm A, 6 (11.3%) patients achieved a complete response and 32 (58.1%), a partial response; in Arm B, 7 (12.7%) patients achieved a complete response and 32 (58.2%) a partial response. The median survival time in Arm A patients was 12 months and in Arm B, 13 months, p=0.354. The time to tumor progression (TTP) was 8 and 6 months for Arms A and B, respectively (p=0.060). Toxicity, although common in both Arms, was acceptable. Neutropenia, anemia and diarrhea were higher in the control Arm. The cisplatin-paclitaxel combination is not superior to cisplatin-etoposide with respect to survival, TTP, toxicity and response rate. The former combination could be applied as an alternative chemotherapy regimen for patients with limited or advanced small-cell lung cancer.