Comparison of efficacy and safety of three different chemotherapy regimens delivered with concomitant radiotherapy in inoperable stage III non-small cell lung cancer patients

Özçelik, Melike; Korkmaz, Taner; Odabaş, Hatice; Gemici, Cengiz; Ercelep, Özlem; Yuksel, Sinemis; Mert, Aslıhan Güven; Sürmeli, Heves; Işik, Deniz; Aydın, Dinçer; Şeker, Mesut; Mayadağlı, Alparslan; Özdemir, Pınar Kutlutürk; Aliustaoğlu, Mehmet; Gümüş, Mahmut

doi:10.1007/s13277-015-4776-1

Cited by 15 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As expected, and consistent with recent studies, 78,100 patients with CIN were more likely to have received a combination of a platinum and a taxane compound and had received higher cumulative doses of CTX. This finding may be related to the receipt of two different classes of CTX drugs that have both overlapping (e.g., mitochondrial dysfunction) and differential (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Chemotherapy-Induced Neuropathy in Cancer Survivors

Miaskowski

Mastick

Paul

et al. 2017

Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Evidence suggests that chemotherapy-induced neuropathy (CIN) is a significant problem for cancer survivors. However, a detailed phenotypic characterization of CIN in cancer survivors is not available. Objectives To evaluate between group differences in demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as in measures of sensation, function, and postural control, in a sample of cancer survivors who received a platinum and/or a taxane-based CTX regimen and did (n=426) and did not (n=197) develop CIN. Methods Survivors completed self-report questionnaires and underwent objective testing (i.e., light touch, pain sensation, cold sensation, vibration, muscle strength, grip strength, Purdue Pegboard test, Timed Get Up and Go Test, Fullerton Advanced Balance test). Parametric and non-parametric statistics were used to compare between group differences in study outcomes. Results Of the 426 survivors with CIN, 4.9% had CIN only in their upper extremities, 27.0% only in their lower extremities, and 68.1% in both their upper and lower extremities. Demographic and clinical characteristics associated with CIN included: older age, lower annual income, higher body mass index, a higher level of comorbidity, being born prematurely, receipt of a higher cumulative dose of chemotherapy, and a poorer functional status. Survivors with CIN had worse outcomes for all of the following objective measures: light touch, pain, temperature, vibration, upper and lower extremity function and balance. Conclusions This study is the first to provide a detailed phenotypic characterization of CIN in cancer survivors who received a platinum and/or a taxane compound. These data can serve as a benchmark for future studies of CIN in cancer survivors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Chemotherapy-Induced Neuropathy in Cancer Survivors

Miaskowski

Mastick

Paul

et al. 2017

Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With such a heterogeneous population, a multi-modality approach involving surgery, radiation, and systemic agents is most commonly employed. A standard treatment option for unresectable or inoperable stage IIIA and stage IIIB disease is concurrent chemoradiation, while management of IIIA is more complex and controversial[ 5 ]. Treatment options for IIIA disease includes surgery with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy, radiation, or both; as well as definitive chemoradiation[ 3 , 5 , 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A standard treatment option for unresectable or inoperable stage IIIA and stage IIIB disease is concurrent chemoradiation, while management of IIIA is more complex and controversial[ 5 ]. Treatment options for IIIA disease includes surgery with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy, radiation, or both; as well as definitive chemoradiation[ 3 , 5 , 6 ]. Long-term outcomes are poor, with baseline 5-year overall survival (OS) of 15%-35% for stage IIIA and 5%-10% for stage IIIB[ 7 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Therapeutic management options for stage III non-small cell lung cancer

Yoon

Shaikh

Hallman

2017

WJCO

197

164

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Majority of newly diagnosed lung cancers are non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), of which up to half are considered locally advanced at the time of diagnosis. Patients with locally advanced stage III NSCLC consists of a heterogeneous population, making management for these patients complex. Surgery has long been the preferred local treatment for patients with resectable disease. For select patients, multi-modality therapy involving systemic and radiation therapies in addition to surgery improves treatment outcomes compared to surgery alone. For patients with unresectable disease, concurrent chemoradiation is the preferred treatment. More recently, research into different chemotherapy agents, targeted therapies, radiation fractionation schedules, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and proton therapy have shown promise to improve treatment outcomes and quality of life. The array of treatment approaches for locally advanced NSCLC is large and constantly evolving. An updated review of past and current literature for the roles of surgery, chemotherapeutic agents, radiation therapy, and targeted therapy for stage III NSCLC patients are presented.

show abstract

“…The results indicated that EP provided more favorable outcomes than DP. Ozcelik et al 27 compared the efficacy and toxicities of EP (etoposide, 50 mg/m 2 , on days 1 to 5 and 29 to 33 plus cisplatin, 50 mg/m 2 , on days 1, 8, 29, and 36), DP (docetaxel, 20 mg/m 2 , on day 1 plus cisplatin, 20 mg/m 2 , on day 1, every week), and PC (paclitaxel, 45 mg/m 2 , on day 1, every week plus carboplatin, AUC = 2) regimens delivered concurrently with radiotherapy for inoperable LA-NSCLC. Although the results did not prove a statistically significant difference in OS among the groups (37 months, 27 months and 23 months, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different administration routes of recombinant human endostatin combined with concurrent chemoradiotherapy might lead to different efficacy and safety profile in unresectable stage III non‐small cell lung cancer: Updated follow‐up results from two phase II trials

Hui

Peng

et al. 2020

Thoracic Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There are two main choices of administration route of recombinant human endostatin (Endostar) available and the treatment options of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) have changed over time. The aim of this study was to observe the long‐term efficacy and safety of different administration routes of Endostar combined with CCRT. Methods Patients with unresectable stage III non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from two phase II trials were included as two cohorts. Both were treated with Endostar combined with CCRT. Endostar was administrated by intravenous injection (7.5 mg/m2/day, seven days) in the IV arm and by continuous intravenous pumping (7.5 mg/m2/24 hours, 120 hours) in the CIV arm. Results A total of 48 patients were included in the IV arm and 67 patients in the CIV arm. The median progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), local recurrence‐free survival (LRFS) and distant metastasis‐free survival (DMFS) in the IV arm and CIV arm were 9.9 months versus 15.4 months (HR = 0.751, 95% CI 0.487–1.160, P = 0.200), 24.0 months versus 38.5 months (HR = 0.746, 95% CI 0.473–1.178, P = 0.209), 32.3 months versus 27.1 months (HR = 1.193, 95% CI 0.673–2.115, P = 0.546), 20.1 months versus 49.7 months (HR = 0.603, 95% CI 0.351–1.036, P = 0.067). The one, three, five‐year PFS in the IV arm and CIV arm was 45.8% versus 52.9%, 18.3% versus 31.4%, and 18.3% versus 27.7% and the one, three, five‐year OS was 81.2% versus 82.1%, 31.1% versus 50.3%, and 31.1% versus 41%, respectively. Incidence of hematological adverse reactions were numerically lower in the CIV arm than the IV arm. Conclusions Endostar delivered by CIV with CCRT may be a better option than IV in terms of potential survival and safety for unresectable stage III NSCLC. Key points Significant findings of the study Endostar delivered by continuous intravenous pumping might achieve more favorable survival over intravenous injection and reduce adverse hematological reactions in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC treated with Endostar combined with CCRT.What this study adds The administration route of recombinant human endostatin is also one key factor for survival and safety to consider when treating patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC.

show abstract

Comparison of efficacy and safety of three different chemotherapy regimens delivered with concomitant radiotherapy in inoperable stage III non-small cell lung cancer patients

Cited by 15 publications

References 24 publications

Chemotherapy-Induced Neuropathy in Cancer Survivors

Chemotherapy-Induced Neuropathy in Cancer Survivors

Therapeutic management options for stage III non-small cell lung cancer

Different administration routes of recombinant human endostatin combined with concurrent chemoradiotherapy might lead to different efficacy and safety profile in unresectable stage III non‐small cell lung cancer: Updated follow‐up results from two phase II trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About