Evidence Hub

Randomized phase II study comparing weekly docetaxel-cisplatin vs. gemcitabine-cisplatin in elderly or poor performance status patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

J. Jang, Hoon-Kyo Kim, B. Cho, K. Lee, H. Yun, I. Woo, H. Song, H. Ryoo et al.

Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology, 2017

99 participants · 11 citations

Abstract

BackgroundDocetaxel/cisplatin (DP) and gemcitabine/cisplatin (GP) are standard treatment regimens for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In spite of potent efficacy, the conventional 1-day DP is regarded as having more toxicity as compared with GP. There is increasing interest in a biweekly split administration of DP to reduce its toxicity. Hypothesis was that first-line biweekly DP is as safe as GP in the elderly or poor performance status (PS) patients.MethodsChemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced NSCLC (IIIB/IV) who were elderly (65<) or PS (ECOG 2) were randomized to DP or GP arm by balancing for ECOG (0–1 vs. 2) and stage (IIIB vs. IV). DP comprised docetaxel (35 mg/m2)/cisplatin (30 mg/m2) iv on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. GP comprised gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2)/cisplatin (30 mg/m2) iv on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. Chemotherapy lasted up to 4–6 cycles or until progression. Primary endpoint was safety (proportion of grade 3/4 toxicities). Planned sample size was 49 patients in each arm.ResultsFrom November 2009 to August 2012, a total of 99 patients were randomized (DP 50/GP 49) from nine institutions. Adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma were observed in 62% and 33% of patients, respectively. Toxicity profiles were comparable for both arms and the differences were not statistically significant except for anemia and leucocytopenia. Any grade of anemia (86 vs. 98%) and of leucocytopenia (18 vs. 43%) was more common in the GP arm with statistical…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 99 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free