Bolus Versus Infusion Regimens of Etoposide and Cisplatin in Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Study of the North Central Cancer Treatment Group

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
In an effort to test clinically the hypothesis that the duration of cellular exposure to etoposide (VP-16) and cisplatin (CDDP) is an important determinant of cytotoxicity, we performed a phase III randomized trial comparing an outpatient bolus regimen of combined VP-16 and CDDP with a sequential infusion over 72 hours of these same two drugs. All patients had stage IV non-small cell lung cancer, and survival was the primary end point Of 113 patients randomly allocated to the study, 108 were assessable for response, survival, and toxicity. A major response was observed in 20 (37%) of 54 patients on the bolus regimen and in 16 (30%) of 54 patients receiving infusion therapy. The median time to progression was 61 and 88 days for bolus and infusion therapy, respectively. The median survival time was 148 and 157 days, respectively ( P = .71). Study results were not consistent with the possibility that infusion therapy could be associated with a 50% improvement in median survival, ie, from 5 months to 7½ months. Toxicity was primarily myelosuppression and was significantly greater with the infusion regimen. We conclude that infusion therapy as tested in this protocol with VP-16 and CDDP does not offer any advantage in response rate, time to disease progression, or survival as compared with bolus therapy. In addition, infusion therapy is associated with a greater degree of neutropenia and more treatment-related deaths. [J Natl Cancer Inst 82:1899–1903,1990]

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: