Gemcitabine–docetaxel versus cisplatin–vinorelbine in advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III study addressing the case for cisplatin
Open Access
- 1 April 2005
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Elsevier in Annals of Oncology
- Vol. 16 (4) , 602-610
- https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdi126
Abstract
Background: This multicenter, randomized, phase III study compared the efficacy, including progression-free survival (PFS), and safety of gemcitabine–docetaxel (GD) combination versus cisplatin–vinorelbine (CV) in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods: Chemonaïve patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were treated with GD (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 plus docetaxel 85 mg/m2 day 8, every 3 weeks for eight cycles) or CV (cisplatin 100 mg/m2 day 1 plus vinorelbine 30 mg/m2, days 1, 8, 15 and 22, every 4 weeks for six cycles). Results: A total of 311 patients were enrolled (155 GD and 156 CV). Neither PFS nor overall survival differed significantly between the two arms (median PFS 4.2 and 4 months; median survival 11.1 and 9.6 months; 1-year survival 46% and 42%, for GD and CV, respectively). For the GD arm compared with the CV arm, the hazard ratio for PFS was 1.04 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83–1.32], and for overall survival, it was 0.90 (95% CI 0.70–1.16). Objective response rates did not differ significantly (31% for GD, 35.9% for CV). Myelosupression, emesis and frequency of febrile neutropenia were less pronounced on the GD arm, whereas fluid retention and pulmonary events were more pronounced. The CV arm experienced a higher number of serious adverse events and a lower compliance with the protocol. There was no quality of life (QoL) difference between arms. Median time to definite impairment of health-related QoL was 153 and 168 days in GD and CV arms, respectively. Conclusions: There was no advantage in PFS with GD compared with CV; however, the CV regimen had higher rate of toxic events, mainly myelosuppression. The herein, non-platinum-containing regimen could be considered as a rational alternative to the cisplatin-based doublet.Keywords
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- American Society of Clinical Oncology Treatment of Unresectable Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Guideline: Update 2003Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2004
- Three-Arm Randomized Study of Two Cisplatin-Based Regimens and Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase III Trial of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Lung Cancer Group—EORTC 08975Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2003
- O-239 Gemcitabine in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): A meta-analysis of survival and progression free survival dataLung Cancer, 2003
- Randomized, Multinational, Phase III Study of Docetaxel Plus Platinum Combinations Versus Vinorelbine Plus Cisplatin for Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: The TAX 326 Study GroupJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2003
- Phase III Randomized Trial Comparing Three Platinum-Based Doublets in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung CancerJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2002
- Platinum-based and non-platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomised multicentre trialThe Lancet, 2001
- Chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis using updated data on individual patients from 52 randomised clinical trialsBMJ, 1995
- The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: A Quality-of-Life Instrument for Use in International Clinical Trials in OncologyJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1993
- The ototoxic mechanism of cisplatinHearing Research, 1990
- Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete ObservationsJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1958