Comparison of concurrent use of thoracic radiation with either carboplatin-paclitaxel or cisplatin-etoposide for patients with stage III non–small-cell lung cancer: A systematic review

dc.contributor.authorSteuer, Conor Ernst
dc.contributor.authorBehera, Madhusmita
dc.contributor.authorErnani, Vinicius
dc.contributor.authorHiggins, Kristin Ann
dc.contributor.authorSaba, Nabil F.
dc.contributor.authorShin, Dongmoon
dc.contributor.authorPakkala, Suchita
dc.contributor.authorPillai, Rathi N.
dc.contributor.authorOwonikoko, Taofeek Kunle
dc.contributor.authorCurran, Walter J.
dc.contributor.authorBelani, Chandra P.
dc.contributor.authorKhuri, Fadlo R.
dc.contributor.authorRamalingam, Suresh S.
dc.contributor.departmentInternal Medicine
dc.contributor.facultyFaculty of Medicine (FM)
dc.contributor.institutionAmerican University of Beirut
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-24T11:51:06Z
dc.date.available2025-01-24T11:51:06Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.description.abstractIMPORTANCE: The 2 most common chemotherapy regimens used concurrently with thoracic radiation for patients with unresectable IIIA and IIIB non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are carboplatin-paclitaxel and cisplatin-etoposide. There are no prospective comparisons of these 2 regimens in this setting. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of published trials to compare outcomes and toxic effects between cisplatin-etoposide and carboplatin-paclitaxel in patients with non–small-cell lung cancer receiving thoracic radiation. EVIDENCE REVIEW: Studies that enrolled patients with stage III disease receiving radiotherapy (RT) with carboplatin-paclitaxel or cisplatin-etoposide were identified using electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library) and meeting abstracts. Trials were excluded if they were phase 1, enrolled less than 10 patients, or included surgical resection. A systematic analysis of extracted data was performed with software using random and fixed effect models. Clinical outcomes were compared using point estimates for weighted values of median overall survival, progression-free survival, response rate, and toxic effects. A 2-tailed t test with a significance level of .05 was used for all comparisons. FINDINGS: Overall, 3090 patients were included from 31 studies in the cisplatin-etoposide groups (median age, 61 years; 65% male; 40% squamous histology; median radiation dose, 63.0 Gy), and 3728 patients from 48 studies in carboplatin-paclitaxel groups (median age, 63 years; 65% male; 40% squamous histology; median radiation dose, 64.6 Gy). There was no significant difference in response rates between cisplatin-etoposide and carboplatin-paclitaxel (58% vs 56%; P = .26), respectively. For cisplatin-etoposide vs carboplatin-paclitaxel, there was no significant difference in median progression free survival (12 months vs 9.3 months; P = .20), overall survival (19.6 months vs 18.4 months; P = .40), or 3-year survival rate (31% vs 25%; P = .50). Cisplatin-etoposide was associated with higher grade 3 to 4 hematological toxic effects compared with carboplatin-paclitaxel (eg, neutropenia [54% vs 23%; P < .001] and grade 3/4 nausea/vomiting [20% vs 11%; P = .03]), while rates of grade 3 to 4 pneumonitis (12% vs 9%; P = .12) and esophagitis (23% vs 21%; P = .27) were similar. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Cisplatin-etoposide and carboplatin-paclitaxel regimens were associated with comparable efficacy when used with concurrent definitive radiotherapy for patients with stage III unresectable NSCLC. The toxic effect profiles favored the carboplatin-paclitaxel regimen. © 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.4280
dc.identifier.eid2-s2.0-85029220579
dc.identifier.pmid27978552
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10938/30986
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherAmerican Medical Association
dc.relation.ispartofJAMA Oncology
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectAntineoplastic agents
dc.subjectAntineoplastic combined chemotherapy protocols
dc.subjectCarboplatin
dc.subjectCarcinoma, non-small-cell lung
dc.subjectChemoradiotherapy
dc.subjectCisplatin
dc.subjectEtoposide
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectLung neoplasms
dc.subjectPaclitaxel
dc.subjectThorax
dc.subjectAntineoplastic agent
dc.subjectAnemia
dc.subjectCancer radiotherapy
dc.subjectCancer staging
dc.subjectCancer survival
dc.subjectClinical outcome
dc.subjectComparative effectiveness
dc.subjectDrug use
dc.subjectEsophagitis
dc.subjectHuman
dc.subjectMeta analysis
dc.subjectMultimodality cancer therapy
dc.subjectNausea
dc.subjectNeutropenia
dc.subjectNon small cell lung cancer
dc.subjectOverall survival
dc.subjectPneumonia
dc.subjectProgression free survival
dc.subjectRadiation dose
dc.subjectReview
dc.subjectSurvival rate
dc.subjectSurvival time
dc.subjectSystematic review
dc.subjectThrombocytopenia
dc.subjectTreatment response
dc.subjectVomiting
dc.titleComparison of concurrent use of thoracic radiation with either carboplatin-paclitaxel or cisplatin-etoposide for patients with stage III non–small-cell lung cancer: A systematic review
dc.typeReview

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2017-8742.pdf
Size:
286.63 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format