464P - Comparision of irinotecan/cisplatin with etoposide/cisplatin in North-West Indian population with extensive-stage disease small-cell lung cancer

Date 20 December 2015
Event ESMO Asia 2015 Congress
Session Poster presentation 2
Topics Anti-Cancer Agents & Biologic Therapy
Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Presenter Surender Beniwal
Citation Annals of Oncology (2015) 26 (suppl_9): 125-147. 10.1093/annonc/mdv532
Authors S.K. Beniwal1, S. Narayan2, G.S. Rao2, M.K. Singhal2, S.L. Jakher2, S.R. Maheria2, N. Sharma2, H.S. Kumar2, A. Sharma2
  • 1Medical Oncology, Acharya Tulsi Regional Cancer Treatment & Research Institute, 334001 - Bikaner/IN
  • 2Radiation Oncology, Acharya Tulsi Cancer Treatment & Research Institut, 334001 - Bikaner/IN

Abstract

Aim/Background

Etoposide and Cisplatin (EP) has been a recognized treatment option for extensive stage disease small-cell lung cancer. The principal of study to determine the effect of Irinotecan/Cisplatin with Etoposide/Cisplatin in North-west Indian population with formerly untreated extensive-stage disease small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).Etoposide and Cisplatin (EP) has been a recognized treatment option for extensive stage disease small-cell lung cancer. The principal of study to determine the effect of Irinotecan/Cisplatin with Etoposide/Cisplatin in North-west Indian population with formerly untreated extensive-stage disease small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC).

Methods

The primary objective was to compare survival in ES-SCLC patients, randomly enrolled to receive IP (n = 59) or EP (n = 61). Patients have received Cisplatin 60 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) on day 1 and Irinotecan 65 mg/m2 IV on days 1 and 8 every 21 days, versus Cisplatin 80 mg/m2 IV on day 1,2 in divided doses and Etoposide 120 mg/m2 IV on day 1 to 3 every 21 days for at least six cycles. Patients with non progressive disease after first-line treatment were considered for prophylactic cranial irradiation. All statistical calculations were performed using SPSS version 20.0 software.

Results

The median disease free survival for IP/EP was 5.1 (95% CI: 4.3-6.9) versus 4.8 months (95% CI: 4.0-6.7) (P= 0.92) and median overall survival 9.7 months (95% CI: 8.8-10.6) v 10.6 months (95% CI: 9.1-11.2) P = 0.84). The patients treated with PCI for IP/EP were (35.6% v 32.8%; P = 0.73). The grade 3/4 toxicities were for IP/EP: neutropenia (37.3% v 78.7%; P <.01), febrile neutropenia (5.1% v 11.4%; P =.12), anemia (6.7% v 16.4%; P = .04), thrombocytopenia (5.1% v 18.0%; P < .01), diarrhea (22.0% v 1.6%; P < .01) and vomiting (10.2% v 4.9%; P = .17).

Conclusions

Treatment with IP was non inferior when compared with EP in North-west Indian population, while comparing the survival analysis (DFS and OS). But patients receiving IP had less grade 3/4 neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, anemia and thrombocytopenia compared with patients receiving EP, but had more diarrhea and vomiting.

Clinical trial identification

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.