We confirmed by our analysis the role of well-known independent prognostic factors for survival, but also identified the effect of the neutrophil count, rarely studied, with the use of two methods: a classical Cox regression model and a RECPAM analysis. The classification of patients into the four subgroups we obtained needs to be validated in other series.

No abstract

We conducted a randomized trial comparing a high (120 mg/m2 day 1) v a standard (60 mg/m2 day 1) dose of cisplatin in combination with etoposide (120 mg/m2 days 3, 5, and 7) in advanced non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). Two hundred forty-one patients were evaluable for survival and 207 for response. We obtained a 25% objective response rate in the standard-dose arm and 29% in the high-dose arm; this difference was not statistically significant. There was no significant improvement in the overall survival or survival of responders with the high-dose regimen. However, toxicity (mainly myelosuppression) was significantly increased in the patients receiving the higher dose of cisplatin. An analysis of prognostic factors showed that disease progression, loss of body weight, performance status, and prior therapy were predictive parameters of survival.

We conclude that maintenance chemotherapy in responding patients is beneficial in SCLC.

The European Lung Cancer Working Party (ELCWP) designed a 3-arm phase III randomised trial to determine the role of accelerated chemotherapy in extensive-disease (ED) small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Eligible patients were randomised between the 3 following arms: (A) Standard chemotherapy with 6 courses of EVI (epirubicin 60 mg m−2, vindesine 3 mg m−2, ifosfamide 5 g m−2; all drugs given on day 1 repeated every three weeks. (B) Accelerated chemotherapy with EVI administered every 2 weeks and GM-CSF support. (C) Accelerated chemotherapy with EVI and oral antibiotics (cotrimoxazole). Primary endpoint was survival. 233 eligible patients were randomised. Chemotherapy could be significantly accelerated in arm B with increased absolute dose-intensity. Best response rates, in the population of evaluable patients, were, respectively for arm A, B and C, 59%, 76% and 70%. The response rate was significantly higher in arm B in comparison to arm A (P = 0.04). There was, however, no survival difference with respective median duration and 2-year rate of 286 days and 5% for arm A, 264 days and 6% for arm B and 264 days and 6% for arm C. Severe thrombopenia occurred more frequently in arm B but without an increased rate of bleeding. Non-severe infections were more frequent in arm B and severe infections were less frequent in arm C. Our trial failed to demonstrate, in ED-SCLC, a survival benefit of chemotherapy acceleration by using GM-CSF support.   http://www.bjcancer.com