Between October 1985 and March 1987, 92 patients were registered on a phase II study of the Northern California Oncology Group investigating the importance of dose intensity in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Treatment consisted of high-dose cisplatin in hypertonic saline (200 mg/m2 on a 28-day cycle) given in a divided day 1 and day 8 schedule. The response rate among 76 assessable patients was 36% (27/76), with complete response (CR) in 8% (6/76) and partial response (PR) in 28% (21/76). If all patients receiving any drug therapy were considered, the overall response rate was 31% (27/87), with CR in 7% (6/87) and PR in 24% (21/87). Median survival times for all assessable patients and all patients receiving any therapy were 37 and 35 weeks, respectively. With the use of a protocol design specifying dose delays rather than dose reduction for toxicity, the mean dose intensity delivered was 47.2 mg/m2 per week, or 94% of projected. Compared with other dose-intensive regimens of cisplatin, this day 1 and day 8 schedule was relatively well tolerated, with peripheral neuropathy as the dose-limiting toxicity. The data on response and median survival times among patients receiving this single-agent therapy are encouraging. They support the potential importance of cisplatin dose intensity in the treatment of NSCLC. Whether these results represent a positive dose-response effect in NSCLC will be tested in a randomized comparative trial of high-dose versus standard-dose cisplatin therapy.
Although increased efficacy has been described with a five-day schedule of high-dose cisplatin (CDDP) in hypertonic saline, severe myelosuppression and cumulative neurotoxicity have limited the usefulness of this therapy. In order to evaluate a possible dose-response relationship in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), 17 patients with metastatic disease were treated with a modified dose schedule delivering the same total dose (200 mg/m2) in a divided day 1 and 8 schedule. During a pilot study, a total of 47 cycles of therapy were administered, with a median of three cycles per patient and a median total cumulative dose of 600 mg/m2. Nine of 17 patients received at least 600 mg/m2. While nephrotoxicity was similar to previous reports of the five-day schedule, the incidence and severity of myelosuppression and peripheral neuropathy were markedly reduced. Using this modified schedule, severe myelosuppression did not occur. Clinically severe peripheral neuropathy developed in only one patient (6%). The overall response rate was 47% (eight of 17 patients). Plasma platinum pharmacokinetics during five cycles of the modified day 1 and 8 schedule were compared with pharmacokinetics of the five-day schedule. Accumulation of plasma ultrafiltrate platinum occurred in the five-day schedule, but not in the day 1 and 8 schedule. This difference in pharmacokinetics is one possible explanation for the reduced toxicity of this modified schedule. Although the degree of activity seen in this pilot study is encouraging, the efficacy of high-dose CDDP in NSCLC remains to be defined. In view of reduced myelosuppression and neurotoxicity, further trials with this modified schedule are indicated.
ImportanceCancer screening deficits during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic were found to persist into 2021. Cancer-related deaths over the next decade are projected to increase if these deficits are not addressed.ObjectiveTo assess whether participation in a nationwide quality improvement (QI) collaborative, Return-to-Screening, was associated with restoration of cancer screening.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsAccredited cancer programs electively enrolled in this QI study. Project-specific targets were established on the basis of differences in mean monthly screening test volumes (MTVs) between representative prepandemic (September 2019 and January 2020) and pandemic (September 2020 and January 2021) periods to restore prepandemic volumes and achieve a minimum of 10% increase in MTV. Local QI teams implemented evidence-based screening interventions from June to November 2021 (intervention period), iteratively adjusting interventions according to their MTVs and target. Interrupted time series analyses was used to identify the intervention effect. Data analysis was performed from January to April 2022.ExposuresCollaborative QI support included provision of a Return-to-Screening plan-do-study-act protocol, evidence-based screening interventions, QI education, programmatic coordination, and calculation of screening deficits and targets.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of QI projects reaching target MTV and counterfactual differences in the aggregate number of screening tests across time periods.ResultsOf 859 cancer screening QI projects (452 for breast cancer, 134 for colorectal cancer, 244 for lung cancer, and 29 for cervical cancer) conducted by 786 accredited cancer programs, 676 projects (79%) reached their target MTV. There were no hospital characteristics associated with increased likelihood of reaching target MTV except for disease site (lung vs breast, odds ratio, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.7 to 4.7). During the preintervention period (April to May 2021), there was a decrease in the mean MTV (slope, −13.1 tests per month; 95% CI, −23.1 to −3.2 tests per month). Interventions were associated with a significant immediate (slope, 101.0 tests per month; 95% CI, 49.1 to 153.0 tests per month) and sustained (slope, 36.3 tests per month; 95% CI, 5.3 to 67.3 tests per month) increase in MTVs relative to the preintervention trends. Additional screening tests were performed during the intervention period compared with the prepandemic period (170 748 tests), the pandemic period (210 450 tests), and the preintervention period (722 427 tests).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this QI study, participation in a national Return-to-Screening collaborative with a multifaceted QI intervention was associated with improvements in cancer screening. Future collaborative QI endeavors leveraging accreditation infrastructure may help address other gaps in cancer care.
To investigate chemotherapeutic dose intensity in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we evaluated a pharmacokinetically designed schedule of high-dose cisplatin (200 mg/m2 per 28-day cycle) plus mitomycin C. Between March 1987 and March 1989, 62 patients were registered for a phase II study of the Northern California Oncology Group (NCOG). The treatment schedule consisted of cisplatin in hypertonic saline given on a divided days 1 and 8 schedule (100 mg/m2 on each day) plus mitomycin C given at a dose of 8 mg/m2 on day 1 of each cycle. In 61 patients evaluable for response analysis, the overall response rate was 39% (24/61), with a complete response being achieved in 6% (4/61) of cases and a partial response, in 33% (20/61). The response according to reviewed histologic subtype included squamous, 53% of patients (10/19); large cell, 31% (4/13); and adenocarcinoma, 34% (10/29). The median survival for all patients was 29.3 weeks. The mean cisplatin and mitomycin C delivered dose intensities in this study were 45 mg/m2 per week (90% of the projected dose) and 1.5 mg/m2 per week (75%). The toxicity of this combination regimen in the 62 enrolled patients was significant but manageable. Leukopenia (WBC, less than 1,000/mm3) and thrombocytopenia (platelets, less than 25,000/mm3) occurred in 3% and 8% of patients treated, respectively. Dose-limiting renal toxicity and clinically significant ototoxicity developed in 8 patients each (13%), and a peripheral sensory neuropathy was observed in 17 cases (27%). Whether this type of dose-intensive therapy results in an improved therapeutic index in NSCLC is currently being evaluated in a randomized comparative trial versus standard-dose cisplatin therapy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.