Danish
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Oncology Letters 2019-May

Randomized controlled trial of lobaplatin plus etoposide vs. cisplatin plus etoposide as first-line therapy in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.

Kun registrerede brugere kan oversætte artikler
Log ind / Tilmeld
Linket gemmes på udklipsholderen
Ying Cheng
Yun Fan
Xiaoqing Liu
Yunpeng Liu
Jiwei Liu
Dong Wang
Yan Yu
Shukui Qin
Wei Liu
Cheng Huang

Nøgleord

Abstrakt

The majority of previous studies of lobaplatin in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) are small phase I-II studies. The present study aimed to verify the non-inferiority (in terms of efficacy) of lobaplatin plus etoposide (EL) vs. cisplatin plus etoposide (EP) in patients with previously untreated extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). This phase III non-inferiority randomized clinical trial enrolled patients at 17 sites between September 2010 and May 2013. Patients were randomized to EL (30 mg/m2 lobaplatin on day 1 and 100 mg/m2 etoposide on days 1-3, for 21-day cycles) or EP (80 mg/m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 100 mg/m2 etoposide on days 1-3, for 21-day cycles). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, disease control rate (DCR), toxicity and quality of life (QoL). A total of 234 patients were randomized to the EL (n=122) and EP (n=112) treatment groups. The median PFS, median OS and DCR were 5.1 vs. 5.3 months (P=0.786), 10.6 vs. 9.7 months (P=0.701) and 85.5 vs. 86.7% (P=0.848) in the EL vs. EP groups, respectively. Patients in the EL group had significantly lower frequencies of nephrotoxicity (2.5 vs. 11.7%; P=0.008), nausea (22.3 vs. 40.5%; P=0.003) and vomiting (14.1 vs. 35.1%; P<0.001) than those in the EP group. Overall, EL was not inferior to EP in terms of PFS and OS. The tolerance and QoL of the EL regimen were better than those of the EP regimen. EL is thus an alternative choice for the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC.

Deltag i vores
facebook-side

Den mest komplette database med medicinske urter understøttet af videnskab

  • Arbejder på 55 sprog
  • Urtekurer, der understøttes af videnskab
  • Urtegenkendelse ved billede
  • Interaktivt GPS-kort - tag urter på stedet (kommer snart)
  • Læs videnskabelige publikationer relateret til din søgning
  • Søg medicinske urter efter deres virkninger
  • Organiser dine interesser og hold dig opdateret med nyhedsundersøgelser, kliniske forsøg og patenter

Skriv et symptom eller en sygdom, og læs om urter, der kan hjælpe, skriv en urt og se sygdomme og symptomer, den bruges mod.
* Al information er baseret på offentliggjort videnskabelig forskning

Google Play badgeApp Store badge