127P - A prospective randomized phase III study evaluating quality of life in advanced non-small cell lung cancer receiving platinum based chemotherapy com...

Date 17 April 2015
Event ELCC 2015
Session Poster lunch
Topics Anti-Cancer Agents & Biologic Therapy
Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer, Metastatic
Presenter Ankita Rungta
Citation Annals of Oncology (2015) 26 (suppl_1): 29-44. 10.1093/annonc/mdv050
Authors A. Rungta1, A. Kapoor2, S. Dutta3
  • 1Mbbs-internee, North Bengal Medical College and Hospital, 734012 - Siliguri/IN
  • 2Radiation Oncology, Acharya Tulsi Regional Cancer Treatment & Research Institute, 334003 - Bikaner/IN
  • 3Radiation Oncology, North Bengal Medical College and Hospital, 734012 - Siliguri/IN



Platinum-based chemotherapy regimens improve survival in patients with advanced non-small lung cancer (NSCLC). The old standard regimen comprised of platinum combined with etoposide where as, in the new standard regimen, paclitaxel/gemcitabine is used with slight survival advantage at the cost of increased toxicities. This study was conducted to evaluate quality of life (QoL) and response of chemotherapy comparing the two regimens.


Between July 2009 and December 2011, chemotherapy naive advanced NSCLC (stage IIIB/IV) patients were randomized 1:1 to receive cisplatin (75 mg/m2 day 1) along with either etoposide (100 mg/m2 day 1-3) or paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 day 1) every 3 weeks for 6 cycles. The assessments were composed of the result of treatment and QoL evaluated by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung Cancer (FACT-L) in both groups. All statistical analyses were performed by using SPSS version 20.0.


137 patients were enrolled in this study (median age: 54 years, males 77.4%, stage IV disease 70.1%, ECOG status 0/1: 62.8%). 69 patients received etoposide while 68 patients received paclitaxel. The two groups were well balanced in terms of age, ECOG status and histology. Though there was a transient improvement, the overall QoL scores showed significant reduction after treatment. However, QOL scores were not significantly different among the two groups. The overall response rate was increased in paclitaxel group compared with etoposide group (57.5% versus 31%, P = 0.002). The median survival duration for the stage IIIB subgroup was 9.1 months for etoposide group versus 12.3 months for paclitaxel group (P = 0.089). For the stage IV subgroup, the median survival time for etoposide arm was 6.9 months versus 8.3 months for paclitaxel (P = 0.326). There were significantly more grade 3/4 neutropenia (16.2% vs. 5.9%, P = 0.03) with the paclitaxel regimen along with non-significantly more neurotoxicity and myalgia.


New standard chemotherapy regimen demonstrated significantly improved overall response rate without decreased QoL. However, use of paclitaxel did not confer significant survival advantage.


All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.