RESUMO
AIM: The purpose of this study was to compare two single agents paclitaxel (intravenous) versus vinorelbine (oral) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with performance status (PS):2. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The patients were randomized to receive either oral vinorelbine 60 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15 every 4 weeks for 4 cycles (group A) or paclitaxel 90 mg/m(2) intravenously for 1 h on days 1, 8, 15 every 4 weeks for a total of 4 cycles (group B). RESULTS: Among the 74 eligible patients (36 in arm A and 38 in arm B) in arm A, two (6%) had a partial response (95% CI, 0.7-18.7) and 5 (14%) had stable disease (95% CI, 4.7-29.5). In arm B, five (13%) had a partial response (95% CI, 4.4-28.1) and 7 (18%) had stable disease (95% CI, 7.7-34.3). No significant difference was found in terms of clinical benefit between the two groups after two cycles of treatment except for appetite in favour of paclitaxel (p=0.01). Median survival was 3.1 months (95% CI, 2.2-4.0) for arm A and 5.1 months (95% CI, 2.7-7.6) for arm B (p=0.95). Toxicity was mild and only alopecia was more profound in the patients of arm B (p=0.008). CONCLUSION: No significant difference was found in clinical benefit between PS:2 NSCLC patients treated with either vinorelbine or paclitaxel.
Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/tratamento farmacológico , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/mortalidade , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/tratamento farmacológico , Adenocarcinoma/tratamento farmacológico , Adenocarcinoma/mortalidade , Adenocarcinoma/secundário , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Neoplasias Ósseas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Ósseas/mortalidade , Neoplasias Ósseas/secundário , Neoplasias Encefálicas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Encefálicas/mortalidade , Neoplasias Encefálicas/secundário , Carcinoma de Células Grandes/diagnóstico , Carcinoma de Células Grandes/genética , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/secundário , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/tratamento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/mortalidade , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/secundário , Progressão da Doença , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Hepáticas/mortalidade , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundário , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/mortalidade , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patologia , Metástase Linfática , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/mortalidade , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/patologia , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Paclitaxel/administração & dosagem , Carcinoma de Pequenas Células do Pulmão/tratamento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Pequenas Células do Pulmão/mortalidade , Carcinoma de Pequenas Células do Pulmão/secundário , Taxa de Sobrevida , Resultado do Tratamento , Vimblastina/administração & dosagem , Vimblastina/análogos & derivados , VinorelbinaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate gemcitabine-carboplatin (GCb) versus single-agent gemcitabine (G) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a performance status (PS) of 2. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to either 1250 mg/m of G (arm A) or 1250 mg/m of G plus carboplatin area under the curve of 3 (arm B). Both treatments were given on days 1 and 14 and were repeated every 28 days for up to four cycles. RESULTS: Among the 90 eligible patients (47 in arm A and 43 in arm B), in arm A, two (4%) had partial responses (95% CI, 0.52%-14.5%) and 10 (21%) had stable disease (95% CI, 10.7%-35.7%). In arm B, six (14%) had partial responses (95% CI, 5.3%-27.9%) and nine (21%) had stable disease (95% CI, 10%-36%) (p = 0.14). No significant difference was found in terms of clinical benefit between the two treatment groups after two cycles of treatment or at the end of chemotherapy. Furthermore, no association was found between clinical benefit and response to treatment (p > 0.05). Median survival was 4.8 months (95% CI, 2.45-7.25) for arm A and 6.7 months (95% CI, 2.47-10.8) for arm B (p = 0.49). Neutropenia (p = 0.007) and thrombocytopenia (p < 0.001) were more common in group B. Nevertheless, no significant differences were found in terms of severe toxicities (p > 0.05 in all cases). CONCLUSION: No significant difference was found in terms of clinical benefit in patients with NSCLC and PS 2 who received single-agent G or GCb. Nevertheless, GCb caused more toxicity, particularly neutropenia and thrombocytopenia.