Quality of life and survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer receiving supportive care plus chemotherapy with carboplatin and etoposide or supportive care only. A multicentre randomised phase III trial. Joint Lung Cancer Study Group. Standard combination versus alternating chemotherapy in small cell lung cancer: a randomised clinical trial including 394 patients. 'Petites Cellules' Group. Randomized comparison of early versus late hyperfractionated thoracic irradiation concurrently with chemotherapy in limited disease small-cell lung cancer: a randomized phase II study of the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group (HeCOG). Chemotherapy versus supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: improved survival without detriment to quality of life. Multiple-drug weekly chemotherapy versus standard combination regimen in small-cell lung cancer: a phase III randomized study conducted by the European Lung Cancer Working Party. A three-arm phase III randomised trial assessing, in patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer, accelerated chemotherapy with support of haematological growth factor or oral antibiotics. Chemotherapy can prolong survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer--report of a Canadian multicenter randomized trial. An intergroup phase III comparison of standard radiation therapy and two schedules of concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with unresectable squamous cell head and neck cancer. Sequential adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy in endometrial cancer--results from two randomised studies. Randomized trial of chemotherapy and radiation therapy with or without warfarin for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B study. Comparison of rapidly cycled tandem high-dose chemotherapy plus peripheral-blood stem-cell support versus dose-dense conventional chemotherapy for adjuvant treatment of high-risk breast cancer: results of a multicentre phase III trial. Randomised trial of high-dose chemotherapy and haemopoietic progenitor-cell support in operable breast cancer with extensive axillary lymph-node involvement. Induction chemotherapy plus high-dose radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in locally advanced unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer. Combination chemotherapy as induction therapy for advanced resectable head and neck cancer. A randomized study of high-dose split course radiotherapy preceded by high-dose chemotherapy versus high-dose radiotherapy only in locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. An EORTC Lung Cancer Cooperative Group trial. Randomized study of postoperative radiotherapy and simultaneous temozolomide without adjuvant chemotherapy for glioblastoma. Phase III study comparing chemotherapy and radiotherapy with preoperative chemotherapy and surgical resection in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with spread to mediastinal lymph nodes (N2); final report of RTOG 89-01. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. Initial versus delayed accelerated hyperfractionated radiation therapy and concurrent chemotherapy in limited small-cell lung cancer: a randomized study. Improving the quality of life during chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. A comparison of intermittent and continuous treatment strategies. Randomized trial of hyperfractionated radiation therapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. Efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with resectable head and neck cancer: a subset analysis of the Head and Neck Contracts Program. Hyperfractionated radiation therapy with or without concurrent low-dose daily carboplatin/etoposide for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomized study. A randomized trial between two neoadjuvant chemotherapy protocols: CDDP + 5-FU versus CDDP + VP16 in advanced cancer of the head and neck. Randomized trial of high-dose chemotherapy and blood cell autografts for high-risk primary breast carcinoma. Feasibility of non-cisplatin-based induction chemotherapy and concurrent chemoradiotherapy in advanced head and neck cancer.
The aim of the present trial was to evaluate the effects of chemotherapy on the quality of life and survival of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (stage IIIB or IV). In a controlled multicentre trial, patients were randomised to receive supportive care only or supportive care plus chemotherapy. Chemotherapy consisted of intravenous (i.v.) carboplatin 300 mg/m2 on day 1 and etoposide 120 mg/m2 orally on days 1-5 every 4 weeks for a maximum of eight courses. Quality of life was measured at randomisation and prior to each treatment course and at corresponding 4-week intervals in the control arm, using the EORTC QLQ-C30 + LC13 questionnaire. 48 patients were randomised (supportive care 26, chemotherapy 22), being eligible for comparative analyses. Another 102 patients, 97 of which received chemotherapy, were subsequently included in the study on an individual treatment preference basis. Data from these patients were used for confirmative purposes. Patients in the chemotherapy group reported better overall physical functioning and symptom control compared with the supportive care group. Group differences were smaller within the psychosocial domain, although trends were seen in favour of the chemotherapy group. No significant differences were seen in favour of the supportive care group, except for hair loss. Median survival times were 29 weeks in the chemotherapy group versus 11 weeks in the supportive care group, and 1-year survival rates were 28% versus 8%. Quality of life and survival outcomes were similar in the randomised and non-randomised patients receiving chemotherapy. No treatment-related deaths occurred. In conclusion, treatment with carboplatin and etoposide can improve both the quality of life and the survival of patients with advanced NSCLC. to compare standard and alternating administration of chemotherapy combinations in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients.
                in a multicenter clinical trial, 394 previously untreated SCLC patients were randomised to receive, every 4 weeks, eight courses of either a standard regimen with CCNU, cyclophosphamide, adriamycin (CCA) and VP16 or an alternating regimen (CCA regimen alternating with cisplatin-vindesine-VP16).
                overall response rate was higher in the standard group (78%) than in the alternating group (64%) (P = 0.0001). Complete response rate was also higher in the standard group (32%) than in the alternating group (18%) (P = 0.004). The median survival in the overall SCLC population was 306 days in the standard group and 272 days in the alternating group (P = 0.08). In limited SCLC patients, median survival was higher in the standard group (421 days) than in the alternating group (328 days) (P = 0.01). Grade III/IV haematological toxicity was lower in patients in the alternating group (25 versus 47%) (P < 0.001).
                the standard regimen was better than the alternating regimen for patients with limited forms of SCLC. The alternating regimen, associated with better haematological safety and ensuring a fairly similar survival, may be considered in patients with extensive SCLC. Pleiomorphic resistance mechanisms to chemotherapy make it difficult to define a non-cross-resistant chemotherapy regimen. Concurrent platinum etoposide chemotherapy given in combination with hyperfractionated thoracic radiation therapy (HTRT) in limited disease (LD) small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is associated with a high response rate and significant prolongation of survival. Given these results, the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group (HeCOG) performed a multicenter randomized phase II study in patients with LD SCLC to evaluate the timing of HTRT (early vs. late) when given concurrently with chemotherapy.
                To be eligible for the study, patients were required to have histologically or cytologically proven LD SCLC, confined to one hemithorax and/or ipsilateral mediastinal or supraclavicular lymphnodes and absence of pleural effusion or controlateral supraclavicular lymphnode involvement. Moreover, patients had to have a good performance status and adequate haematological, liver and renal function. Patients with LD SCLC were randomized to receive HTRT either concurrently with the first (Group A) or with the fourth (Group B) cycle of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy consisted of carboplatin administered at an AUC of six given as an i.v. 1-hour-infusion immediately followed by etoposide at a dose of 100 mg/m2 i.v. as a two-hour infusion for three consecutive days every three weeks up to a total of six cycles. Prophylactic cranial irradiation was also given to patients achieving a complete response.
                42 and 39 patients, were eligible for efficacy evaluation in group A and B respectively. The overall response rate was 76% in group A and 92.5% in group B (P = 0.07) with a complete response rate of 40.5% and 56.5%, respectively. After a median follow-up of 35 months, time to progression was 9.5 months in group A and 10.5 in group B (NS) while overall median survival was 17.5 and 17 months respectively (NS). The 2-year survival was 36% in group A and 29% in group B (NS) and the 3-year survival 22% and 13%, respectively (NS). The distant relapse rate was 38% in group A and 61% in group B (P = 0.046). Severe grade 3 4 anemia was recorded in 19% of group A and 12.5% of group B (NS), while severe leucopenia was recorded in 35.5% and 20.5% (P = 0.09) and neutropenic fever in 5% and 2.5% (NS), respectively. Severe thrombocytopenia did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups being 21.5% and 23%, respectively. Severe grade 2-3 esophageal toxicity was 19% in group A and 23% in group B (NS), while grade 3 lung toxicity was 5% and 7.5% (NS), respectively. No toxicity-related deaths were recorded.
                Concurrent administration of HTRT with carboplatin etoposide is associated with a high response and survival rate. Although a trend for higher response rate was recorded in the group of patients who received late HTRT, the overall median, 2-year and 3-year survival rates did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups. The toxicity of this promising therapeutic approach was acceptable. Comparative phase III studies with an adequate number of patients are recommended in order to answer this question. In 1995 a meta-analysis of randomised trials investigating the value of adding chemotherapy to primary treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) suggested a small survival benefit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy in each of the primary treatment settings. However, the meta-analysis included many small trials and trials with differing eligibility criteria and chemotherapy regimens.
                The aim of the Big Lung Trial was to confirm the survival benefits seen in the meta-analysis and to assess quality of life and cost in the supportive care setting. A total of 725 patients were randomised to receive supportive care alone (n = 361) or supportive care plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy (n = 364).
                65% of patients allocated chemotherapy (C) received all three cycles of treatment and a further 27% received one or two cycles. 74% of patients allocated no chemotherapy (NoC) received thoracic radiotherapy compared with 47% of the C group. Patients allocated C had a significantly better survival than those allocated NoC: HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.89, p = 0.0006), median survival 8.0 months for the C group v 5.7 months for the NoC group, a difference of 9 weeks. There were 19 (5%) treatment related deaths in the C group. There was no evidence that any subgroup benefited more or less from chemotherapy. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of the pre-defined primary and secondary quality of life end points, although large negative effects of chemotherapy were ruled out. The regimens used proved to be cost effective, the extra cost of chemotherapy being offset by longer survival.
                The survival benefit seen in this trial was entirely consistent with the NSCLC meta-analysis and subsequent similarly designed large trials. The information on quality of life and cost should enable patients and their clinicians to make more informed treatment choices. A randomized trial was conducted in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) to determine if survival can be improved by a weekly chemotherapy regimen combining various drugs.
                Two hundred twenty-three patients were randomized to receive either six courses of a multiple-drug combination (MDC) regimen (Adriamycin [ADR; doxorubicin; Farmitalia Carlo Erba, Milan, Italy] 25 mg/m2 intravenously [i.v.] on day 1; etoposide [VP16] 120 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1; cyclophosphamide [CPA] 500 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1; cisplatin 60 mg/m2 i.v. on day 8; vindesine [VDS] 3 mg/m2 i.v. on day 8; vincristine [VCR] 2 mg i.v. on day 15; methotrexate [MTX] 100 mg/m2 i.v. on day 15), or a standard chemotherapy (SC) regimen (ADR 50 mg/m2 i.v. on day 1; CPA 1 g/m2 i.v. on day 1; VP16 80 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1 to 3).
                In 98 MDC-treated and 101 SC-treated assessable patients, we observed 69% and 62% objective responses rates, respectively. There was no significant difference in survival, with median durations and 2-year overall survival rates of 49 and 43 weeks and 8.5% and 7.9%, respectively. There was a significant increase in response rate in favor of MDC patients with limited disease (84% v 62%). Toxicity was tolerable, although SC was more hematotoxic, with 76% (v 59%) experiencing leukopenia and 17% (v 7%) experiencing thrombocytopenia (grades III and IV). If the cumulative doses received were nearly equal to the scheduled cumulative doses in both arms, the total relative dose-intensity (RDI) was significantly higher in the SC arm. The difference was due to increased treatment delays in the MDC arm.
                Weekly MDC failed to improve survival rates in patients with SCLC. The European Lung Cancer Working Party (ELCWP) designed a 3-arm phase III randomised trial to determine the role of accelerated chemotherapy in extensive-disease (ED) small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Eligible patients were randomised between the 3 following arms: (A) Standard chemotherapy with 6 courses of EVI (epirubicin 60 mg m(-2), vindesine 3 mg m(-2), ifosfamide 5 g m(-2); all drugs given on day 1 repeated every three weeks. (B) Accelerated chemotherapy with EVI administered every 2 weeks and GM-CSF support. (C) Accelerated chemotherapy with EVI and oral antibiotics (cotrimoxazole). Primary endpoint was survival. 233 eligible patients were randomised. Chemotherapy could be significantly accelerated in arm B with increased absolute dose-intensity. Best response rates, in the population of evaluable patients, were, respectively for arm A, B and C, 59%, 76% and 70%. The response rate was significantly higher in arm B in comparison to arm A (P = 0.04). There was, however, no survival difference with respective median duration and 2-year rate of 286 days and 5% for arm A, 264 days and 6% for arm B and 264 days and 6% for arm C. Severe thrombopenia occurred more frequently in arm B but without an increased rate of bleeding. Non-severe infections were more frequent in arm B and severe infections were less frequent in arm C. Our trial failed to demonstrate, in ED-SCLC, a survival benefit of chemotherapy acceleration by using GM-CSF support. The survival benefit of combination chemotherapy to patients with advanced non-small-cell carcinoma of the lung (NSCLC) is controversial. To study this question, the National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCIC) Clinical Trials Group conducted a prospective randomized trial comparing best supportive care (BSC) to two chemotherapy regimens, vindesine and cisplatin (VP), and cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (CAP). Between February 1983 and January 1986, 23 centers across Canada entered 251 patients on study. Eighteen centers participated in the three-arm schema (150 patients); centers choosing not to participate in a study with a no-chemotherapy arm followed a two-arm schema comparing VP with CAP (101 additional patients). Altogether, 233 patients were eligible. Patients had measurable or evaluable disease, with either distant metastases (82.5%) or bulky limited disease considered inoperable or unsuitable for radical radiotherapy. The treatment groups were comparable in terms of age, sex, performance status, histology, disease extent, and weight loss. The overall response rates (complete response [CR] plus partial response [PR]) on the chemotherapy arms were CAP, 15.3%, and VP, 25.3% (P = .06). Patients on the three-arm portion of the trial had a median survival of 32.6 weeks when treated with VP, 24.7 weeks with CAP, and 17 weeks with BSC. The significance of the differences in survival, adjusted for prognostic factors, is as follows: chemotherapy v BSC, P = .02; VP v BSC, P = .01; and CAP v BSC, P = .05. Toxicity on the chemotherapy arms was significant, with leukopenia of severe or greater degree occurring in 37.8% (CAP) and 40.0% (VP), severe vomiting in 12.2% (CAP) and 23.3% (VP), and severe neurotoxicity in 15.6% (VP). The Head and Neck Intergroup conducted a phase III randomized trial to test the benefit of adding chemotherapy to radiation in patients with unresectable squamous cell head and neck cancer.
                Eligible patients were randomly assigned between arm A (the control), single daily fractionated radiation (70 Gy at 2 Gy/d); arm B, identical radiation therapy with concurrent bolus cisplatin, given on days 1, 22, and 43; and arm C, a split course of single daily fractionated radiation and three cycles of concurrent infusional fluorouracil and bolus cisplatin chemotherapy, 30 Gy given with the first cycle and 30 to 40 Gy given with the third cycle. Surgical resection was encouraged if possible after the second chemotherapy cycle on arm C and, if necessary, as salvage therapy on all three treatment arms. Survival data were compared between each experimental arm and the control arm using a one-sided log-rank test.
                Between 1992 and 1999, 295 patients were entered on this trial. This did not meet the accrual goal of 362 patients and resulted in premature study closure. Grade 3 or worse toxicity occurred in 52% of patients enrolled in arm A, compared with 89% enrolled in arm B (P <.0001) and 77% enrolled in arm C (P <.001). With a median follow-up of 41 months, the 3-year projected overall survival for patients enrolled in arm A is 23%, compared with 37% for arm B (P =.014) and 27% for arm C (P = not significant).
                The addition of concurrent high-dose, single-agent cisplatin to conventional single daily fractionated radiation significantly improves survival, although it also increases toxicity. The loss of efficacy resulting from split-course radiation was not offset by either multiagent chemotherapy or the possibility of midcourse surgery. Endometrial cancer patients with high grade tumours, deep myometrial invasion or advanced stage disease have a poor prognosis. Randomised studies have demonstrated the prevention of loco-regional relapses with radiotherapy (RT) with no effect on overall survival (OS). The possible additive effect of chemotherapy (CT) remains unclear. Two randomised clinical trials (NSGO-EC-9501/EORTC-55991 and MaNGO ILIADE-III) were undertaken to clarify if sequential combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) in high-risk endometrial cancer. The two studies were pooled.
                Patients (n=540; 534 evaluable) with operated endometrial cancer International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (FIGO) stage I-III with no residual tumour and prognostic factors implying high-risk were randomly allocated to adjuvant radiotherapy with or without sequential chemotherapy.
                In the NSGO/EORTC study, the combined modality treatment was associated with 36% reduction in the risk for relapse or death (hazard ratio (HR) 0.64, 95%confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.99; P=0.04); two-sided tests were used. The result from the Gynaecologic Oncology group at the Mario Negri Institute (MaNGO)-study pointed in the same direction (HR 0.61), but was not significant. In the combined analysis, the estimate of risk for relapse or death was similar but with narrower confidence limits (HR 0.63, CI 0.44-0.89; P=0.009). Neither study showed significant differences in the overall survival. In the combined analysis, overall survival approached statistical significance (HR 0.69, CI 0.46-1.03; P=0.07) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) was significant (HR 0.55, CI 0.35-0.88; P=0.01).
                Addition of adjuvant chemotherapy to radiation improves progression-free survival in operated endometrial cancer patients with no residual tumour and a high-risk profile. A remaining question for future studies is if addition of radiotherapy to chemotherapy improves the results.
                Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Studies by the Veterans Administration Cooperative Studies Program and Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) suggested that the addition of warfarin to chemotherapy might enhance response and/or survival in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). This randomized study evaluated the effect of warfarin with chemotherapy and radiation therapy in limited-stage SCLC.
                Patients were randomized to receive warfarin or no warfarin. All patients received three cycles of doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide (ACE). Cycles 4 and 5 (cisplatin, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide [PCE]) were given concurrently with radiation therapy. Three cycles of ACE were given after chemoradiation therapy, but were discontinued due to a high rate of pulmonary toxicity.
                There were no significant differences in response rates, survival, failure-free survival, disease-free survival, or patterns of relapse between the warfarin-treated and control groups. In patients treated according to the initial design, an increase in failure-free survival seen with warfarin treatment approached significance (P = .07). Preamendment results, while not significant, did not have superimposable treatment survival curves. A landmark analysis at 8 months showed a median survival time after the landmark for complete responders of 33 months with warfarin treatment compared with < or = 13.75 months for complete or partial responders not treated with warfarin (P = .05). Differences between the complete responders in this preamendment population were not significant (P = .103).
                Warfarin does not appear to improve outcome significantly in limited-stage SCLC. However, the differences in some variables between populations before the protocol amendment correspond to the favorable effects of anticoagulants observed in previous studies. Breast cancer with extensive axillary-lymph-node involvement has a poor prognosis after conventional treatment. In trials with historical controls, high-dose chemotherapy produced improved outcomes. We compared an intensive double-cycle high-dose chemotherapy regimen with an accelerated conventionally dosed regimen in high-risk breast cancer in a multicentre trial.
                Patients with at least nine positive nodes were randomly assigned either two courses of accelerated (2-week intervals, with filgrastim support), conventionally dosed epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by two courses of high-dose chemotherapy (epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and thiotepa supported by peripheral-blood progenitors) or four identical cycles of epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by three cycles of accelerated cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. The primary endpoint was event-free survival. Analyses were done both by intention to treat and per protocol.
                403 patients were enrolled; 201 were assigned high-dose chemotherapy and 202 conventional treatment. The mean number of positive nodes was 17.6, and median follow-up was 48.6 months. 4-year event-free survival (intention-to-treat analysis) was 60% (95% CI 53-67) in the high-dose chemotherapy group and 44% (37-52) in the control group (p=0.00069). The corresponding overall survival was 75% (69-82) versus 70% (64-77; p=0.02). There were no treatment-related deaths.
                Our finding of significant improvements in both event-free and overall survival for high-dose chemotherapy compared with a dose-dense conventional regimen contrasts with the results of other studies. The discrepancy might be due partly to design differences (tandem, brief induction) between our regimen and those studied in other trials. This approach merits further study. Uncontrolled studies suggest that high-dose chemotherapy is beneficial in patients with breast cancer and multiple metastases to the axillary lymph nodes. Many physicians accept this treatment as standard care. We aimed to assess adjuvant high-dose chemotherapy in breast cancer in a phase II randomised trial.
                97 women aged younger than 60 years, who had breast cancer with extensive axillary-node metastases (confirmed by a tumour-positive infraclavicular lymph-node biopsy), received three courses of up-front chemotherapy (FE120C). This regimen consisted of cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2, epirubicin 120 mg/m2, and 5-fluorouracil 500 mg/m2 once weekly for 3 weeks. After surgery, stable patients or those who responded to chemotherapy were randomly assigned conventional therapy (fourth course of FE120C, followed by radiation therapy and 2 years of tamoxifen [40 patients]) or high-dose therapy (identical treatment but an additional high-dose regimen and peripheral-blood progenitor-cell [PBPC] support after the fourth FE120C course [41 patients]). This high-dose regimen comprised cyclophosphamide 6 g/m2, thiotepa 480 mg/m2, and carboplatin 1600 mg/m2. The primary endpoint was overall and disease-free survival. All analyses were by intention to treat.
                No patients died from toxic effects of chemotherapy. With a median follow-up of 49 (range 21-76) months, the 4-year overall and relapse-free survivals for all 97 patients were 75% and 54%, respectively. There was no significant difference in survival between the patients on conventional therapy and those on high-dose therapy.
                High-dose therapy is associated with substantial cost and acute toxic effects, but also has potentially irreversible long-term effects. Until the benefit of this therapy is substantiated by large-scale phase III trials, high-dose chemotherapy should not be used in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer, apart from in randomised studies. High-dose radiation therapy is generally recommended as standard treatment in regionally advanced unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but median- and long-term survival remain poor. Some reports have recently shown an improvement of results in advanced NSCLC when cisplatin was included in the chemotherapy regimens. Therefore, we designed a randomized trial to determine whether induction chemotherapy before high-dose radiotherapy improves response rate and survival in stage III NSCLC over that achieved with radiotherapy alone.
                From March, 1984 to December, 1988, 66 consecutive patients with stage III unresectable NSCLC were randomized to one of two treatment arms; 61 were evaluable for survival and 58 for response and toxicity. Patients randomly assigned to arm A received cisplatin (CDDP 100 mg/m2 on day 1) and etoposide (VP 16 120 mg/m2 on days 1, 2, 3) every 3 wks for 3 courses followed by radiotherapy 56 Gy on pre-treatment tumor volume and 40 Gy on mediastinum and bilateral supraclavicular nodes. Patients assigned to arm B received only the same radiotherapy. The 61 eligible patients were comparable in terms of age, performance status, histology and treatment.
                Response rate was 53% in arm A and 32% in arm B. The median survival was 52 wks for the combined treatment arm and 36 wks for the radiation therapy arm. At six years of follow-up all the patients were dead. Toxicity was mild and no treatment-related deaths were recorded.
                Induction chemotherapy produced a better response rate and a trend of improved survival (4 months) but a significant survival advantage was not achieved (p < 0.11), probably because of the small number of patients enrolled in the trial. Fifty-four previously untreated patients with locally advanced resectable squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) were enrolled into a prospective randomized controlled trial to evaluate whether induction chemotherapy improves the disease-free survival compared to the standard treatment (surgery + radiation). Thirty patients received chemotherapy, which consisted of cisplatin 20 mg/m2 day 1-5, bleomycin 10 mg/m2, continuous infusion from day 3-7, and methotrexate 40 mg/m2 given on day 15 and day 22. The cycle was repeated on day 29 for two cycles. Twenty patients completed chemotherapy courses. Overall response rate was 77% (23 of 30). No survival improvement was observed. Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated survival (and 95% confidence interval) at 3 years was 57% (29%-84%) for the control group and 60% (34%-87%) for the chemotherapy group, and 57% (29%-84%) and 45% (12%-78%) at 4 years (P = 0.736). However, patients who had a complete response were significantly better in terms of long-term survivors (5 of 7 patients were still alive), in contrast to patients who had partial responses among whom only 4 of 16 were alive. Toxicities of this induction protocol are tolerable; one chemotherapy-related death occurred from profound thrombocytopenia. If efforts in determining a chemotherapy-sensitive patient were successfully established, along with a better sequence and the discovery of new and safer drugs, survival of SCCHN should be much improved. The treatment results of radiotherapy in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer are very poor. Several phase II studies showed that neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy was feasible in this patient group and suggested that treatment outcome might improve. A randomized phase II study was performed addressing the response rate and morbidity of high-dose split course radiotherapy (RT) versus the same radiotherapy preceded by high-dose chemotherapy (CT) in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.
                Seventy eligible patients were randomized in this study. CT consisted of cisplatin 100 mg/m2 days 1 and 22, and vindesine 3 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 22 and 29. Radiotherapy started on day 43 in the combined arm and immediately in the RT-only arm. The primary tumour and the regional nodes were treated by 30 Gy/10 fractions/2 weeks and after the split by a second course of 25 Gy/10 fractions/2 weeks. In the combined arm a third CT cycle was planned during the split between RT courses.
                In the CT + RT arm 34 patients were evaluable for response and toxicity and 30 patients in the RT only arm. After completion of treatment 7 patients had a complete response (2 in the CT plus RT arm, 5 in the RT alone arm) and 26 patients a partial response (13 in the CT plus RT arm, 13 in the RT alone arm) for an overall response rate of 52% (95% CI 39%-65%). Acute toxicity was worse in the combined treatment arm with grade 4 leucocytopenia in 8 patients and thrombocytopenia grade 4 in one patient. Three patients had reversible renal toxicity grade 2. There was one toxic death in the RT plus CT arm. There was no enhancement of acute or late radiation pulmonary or oesophageal toxicity. Time to progressive disease (median 30 vs. 35 weeks) and overall survival time (median 12 months) were equal in both treatment arms.
                High-dose radiotherapy preceded by high-dose chemotherapy was more toxic than radiotherapy alone and did not result in this study in any benefit in terms of response rate, time to progressive disease and overall survival. To evaluate the efficacy of simultaneous postoperative temozolomide radiochemotherapy in glioblastoma patients.
                From February 2002 to July 2004, n = 65 patients from 11 German centers with macroscopic complete tumor resection were randomized to receive either postoperative radiotherapy alone (RT, n = 35) or postoperative radiotherapy with simultaneous temozolomide (RT + TMZ, n = 30). Patients were stratified according to age (< or =/>50 years) and WHO performance score (0-1 vs. 2). RT consisted of 60 Gy in 30 fractions. In the RT + TMZ arm, oral TMZ was administered daily at a dose of 75 mg/m(2) including weekends (40-42 doses). Adjuvant treatment was not given, but in both arms, patients with recurrent tumors and in good condition (WHO 0-2) were scheduled for salvage chemotherapy with TMZ.
                The trial was stopped early due to the results of EORTC-study 26981-22981 that showed a survival benefit for the combination of concomitant and adjuvant TMZ compared to radiotherapy alone. In total, 62/65 patients were evaluable. Stratification variables were well balanced (< or = 50 years 26% vs. 20%, WHO 0-1 91% vs. 100%). Neither overall survival (median 17 vs. 15 months) nor progression-free survival (median 7 vs. 6 months) differed significantly between the two arms. In the RT (RT + TMZ) arm, 76% (62%) of the progressing patients received salvage chemotherapy with TMZ, 36% (50%) had a second resection. There was a time-constant trend for increased general quality of life (EORTC questionnaire QLQ C30) and brain-specific quality of life (EORTC questionnaire B20) in the combined arm. Lymphopenia G3-4 was more frequent (33 vs. 6%) in the RT + TMZ arm.
                After early closure of this trial, a benefit for progression-free survival for simultaneous TMZ radiochemotherapy alone could not be demonstrated. In both arms, salvage therapies were frequently used and probably had a major effect on overall survival. To compare the outcome of treatment of mediastinoscopy-verified N2 non-small-cell lung cancer treated with induction chemotherapy followed by either surgery or radiotherapy (RT), with both options followed by consolidation chemotherapy.
                A randomized Phase III trial for Stage IIIA (T1-T3N2M0) non-small cell lung cancer was conducted by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group between April 1990 and April 1994. After documentation of N2 disease by mediastinoscopy or anterior mediastinotomy, patients received induction chemotherapy with cisplatin, vinblastine, and mitomycin-C. Mitomycin-C was later dropped from the induction regimen. Patients were then randomized to surgery or RT (64 Gy in 7 weeks) followed by cisplatin and vinblastine.
                RTOG 89-01 accrued 75 patients, of whom 73 were eligible and analyzable. Twelve patients received induction chemotherapy but were not randomized to RT or surgery thereafter. Forty-five patients were randomized to postinduction RT or surgery. Of the analyzable patients, 90% had a Karnofsky performance score of 90-100, 18% had weight loss >5%, 37% had squamous cell histologic features, and 54% had bulky N2 disease. The distribution of bulky N2 disease was uniform among the treatment arms. The incidence of Grade 4 toxicity was 56% in patients receiving mitomycin-C and 29% in those who did not. Only 1 patient in each group had acute nonhematologic toxicity greater than Grade 3 (nausea and vomiting). No acute Grade 4 radiation toxicity developed. The incidences of long-term toxicity were equivalent across the arms. Three treatment-related deaths occurred: 2 patients in the surgical arms (one late pulmonary toxicity and one pulmonary embolus), and 1 patient in the radiation arm (radiation pneumonitis). Induction chemotherapy was completed in 78% of the patients. Complete resection was performed in 73% of 26 patients undergoing thoracotomy. Consolidation chemotherapy was completed in 75% of the patients. No statistically significant difference was found among the treatment arms. The overall progression-free survival rate was 53% at 1 year and 17% at 3 years. The median progression-free survival was 14 months. No difference in the 1-year survival rate (70% vs. 66%) or median survival time (19.4 vs. 17.4 months) between the surgery and RT arms. The median survival in the patients receiving induction chemotherapy only was 8.9 months. Mitomycin-C had no impact on survival (p = 0.75). No statistically significant difference was noted in the time to local failure between the surgical and RT arms.
                The patient accrual to this trial made its results inconclusive, but several observations are notable. In this trial, histologic confirmation of N2 disease in the surgical and nonsurgical arms eliminated the usual biases from clinical staging. In this setting, local control and survival were essentially equal between the surgical and RT arms. The 3- and 5-year survival rates of nonsurgical therapy were comparable to published surgical trials of N2 disease. To perform a randomized study of the optimal timing of thoracic radiation (RT) as accelerated hyperfractionated radiation therapy (ACC HFX RT) in combination with concurrent chemotherapy (CHT) in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC).
                Between 1988 and 1992, 107 patients were enrolled and 103 were assessable. All patients received ACC HFX RT with 1.5 Gy twice daily to 54 Gy plus concurrent daily carboplatin/etoposide (C/E) (30 mg each) and four sequential cycles of cisplatin/etoposide (PE) (30 mg/m2 and 120 mg/m2, respectively, on days 1 to 3). Group I patients (n = 52) received concurrent chemoradiation at weeks 1 to 4, and group II (n = 51) at weeks 6 to 9. Patients who showed a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) underwent prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) at weeks 16 to 17.
                The median survival time was 34 months in group I and 26 months in group II, and the Kaplan-Meier 5-year survival rates were 30% and 15%, respectively. The difference was almost significant on univariate analysis (P = .052) and was significant on multivariate analysis (P = .027). Group I patients had a significantly higher local control rate than group II patients, but there was no difference between the two groups in distant metastasis rate. There was no difference in the incidence of acute or late grade 3 to 4 toxicity.
                Initial administration of thoracic ACC HFX RT with concurrent C/E seems to produce better local control and survival rates than delayed administration. Since chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer is not curative, consideration of the quality of life is important in selecting a treatment regimen. We conducted a randomized trial comparing continuous chemotherapy, administered until disease progression was evident, with intermittent therapy, whereby treatment was stopped after three cycles and then repeated for three more cycles only when there was evidence of disease progression. Each approach was tested with doxorubicin combined with cyclophosphamide or with cyclophosphamide combined with methotrexate, fluorouracil, and prednisone. Intermittent therapy resulted in a significantly worse response (P = 0.02 by Mann-Whitney test), a significantly shorter time to disease progression (relative risk based on proportional-hazards model, 1.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.4 to 2.4), and a trend toward shorter survival (relative risk, 1.3; confidence interval, 0.99 to 1.6). The quality of life was expressed as linear-analogue self-assessment scores for physical well-being, mood, pain, and appetite and as a quality-of-life index. It improved significantly during the first three cycles, when all patients received treatment. Thereafter, intermittent therapy was associated with worse scores for physical well-being (by 23 percent of scale; 95 percent confidence interval, 11 to 35 percent), mood (25 percent; 13 to 37 percent), and appetite (12 percent; 0 to 24 percent) and for the quality-of-life index as indicated by the patient (14 percent; 5 to 23 percent) and the physician (16 percent; 7 to 26 percent). Changes in the quality of life were independent prognostic factors in proportional-hazards models of subsequent survival. We conclude that, as tested, continuous chemotherapy is better than intermittent chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer. To investigate the efficacy of combined hyperfractionated radiation therapy (HFX RT) and concurrent chemotherapy (CHT) in stage IIIA or IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) compared with that of HFX RT alone.
                Between January 1988 and December 1989, 169 patients were divided randomly into the following groups: group I, HFX RT with 1.2 Gy twice daily to a total dose of 64.8 Gy (n = 61); group II, same HFX RT with CHT consisting of 100 mg of carboplatin (CBDCA) on days 1 and 2 and 100 mg of etoposide (VP-16) on days 1 to 3 of each week during the RT course (n = 52); and group III, same HFX RT with CHT consisting of 200 mg of CBDCA on days 1 and 2 and 100 mg of VP-16 on days 1 to 5 of the first, third, and fifth weeks of the RT course (n = 56).
                The median survival time (MST) was 8 months for group I, 18 months for group II, and 13 months for group III. The 3-year survival rates were 6.6%, 23%, and 16%, respectively. There was a significant difference in the survival rate between groups I and II (P = .0027, log-rank test), but not between groups I and III (P = .17) or between groups II and III (P = .14). The relapse-free survival rate in group II was also higher than that in group I (P = .0024), which was largely due to improved local control in group II patients. Patients in groups II and III showed a higher incidence of acute and/or late high-grade toxicity compared with group I patients, but no patient died of treatment-related toxicity.
                The combination of HFX RT and continuous CBDCA/VP-16 CHT was tolerable and substantially increased the survival rate. To evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with advanced head and neck squamous cancer, the Head and Neck Contracts Program conducted a three-arm study comparing standard surgery and radiation, induction chemotherapy (cisplatin and bleomycin) plus standard therapy, and induction chemotherapy plus standard therapy followed by maintenance cisplatin for 6 months. As previously reported, this trial of 462 patients demonstrated no significant difference in disease-free survival or survival, but a significantly lower metastatic rate in the maintenance arm. To determine whether particular subgroups may have benefited from adjuvant therapy, we evaluated results based on primary site, and tumor (T) and node (N) stage. Of the 192 patients with oral cavity cancer, those on the maintenance arm had a significantly improved 3-year disease-free survival (67%) compared with the standard arm (49%) or induction arm (44%) (overall P = .05). For hypopharyngeal and laryngeal cancers there was no marked overall benefit. For the 106 patients with T1 plus T2 disease, there was marginal improvement in disease-free survival for the maintenance group (72%) compared with the standard group (47%) or induction group (43%) (overall P = .09). There was no advantage for patients with T3 and T4 disease. There was superior disease-free survival for patients with N1 disease on the maintenance arm (70%) compared with the standard arm (42%) (P = .024). The same was true for disease-free survival in 109 patients with N2 disease: standard (52%), induction (30%), maintenance (84%) (overall P less than .001). There was no benefit for N3 disease. A significant survival advantage with maintenance chemotherapy was only seen for N2 disease (overall P = .04). Since head and neck cancer patients are a heterogeneous group, there may be particular sites and stages for which adjuvant chemotherapy would be advantageous, and subset analysis can help indicate directions for new trials. To investigate the efficacy of concurrent hyperfractionated radiation therapy (HFX RT) and low-dose daily chemotherapy (CHT) in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
                Between January 1990 and December 1991, 131 patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed stage III NSCLC, Karnofsky performance status (KPS) > or = 50, and no previous therapy were randomly treated as follows: group I, HFX RT with 1.2 Gy twice daily to a total dose of 69.6 Gy (n = 66); and group II, same HFX RT with CHT consisting of 50 mg of carboplatin (CBDCA) and 50 mg of etoposide (VP-16) given on each RT day (n = 65).
                Group II patients had a significantly longer survival time than group I patients, with a median survival of 22 versus 14 months and 4-year survival rates of 23% versus 9% (P = .021). The median time to local recurrence and 4-year local recurrence-free survival rate were also significantly higher in group II than in group I (25 v 20 months and 42% v 19% respectively, P = .015). In contrast, the distant metastasis-free survival rate did not significantly differ in the two groups (P = .33). The two groups showed similar incidence of acute and late high-grade toxicity (P = .44 and .75, respectively). No treatment-related toxicity was observed.
                The combination of HFX RT and low-dose daily CBDCA plus VP-16 was tolerable and improved the survival of patients with stage III NSCLC as a result of improved local control. We investigated a phase III randomized trial to compare efficacy and tolerance of CDDP + 5-FU to CDDP + VP16, both given intravenously in patients with unresectable advanced head and neck cancer. The 197 eligible patients were paired off successively on the basis of tumor sites and UICC stage. Comparisons were made through sequential closed plans. In 179 patients, tumor beds and cervical lymph nodes were irradiated, and 20 patients underwent salvage surgical procedures. Cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil showed a response (CR + PR) rate of 15% greater than that observed with cisplatin plus etoposide (alpha=0.05, power 70%). Complete responses played a major role in the CDDP + 5-FU regimen. Furthermore, we noted a higher cervical node regression with this chemotherapy combination. Because radiotherapy was administered after chemotherapy, we could not analyze the mean duration response for each protocol. No significant difference in survival existed between the two groups. Myelosuppression was the most frequent sign of toxicity observed, especially with the CDDP + VP16 regimen. Mucositis was rare with allopurinol protection. In the CDDP + 5-FU group, one patient had grade 4 cardiac dysfunction, and 3 patients exhibited unconsciousness that may be related to cerebral vascular damage. Thirteen patients died, with 8 cases related to septic shock (5 CPPP + VP16 and 3 CDDP + 5-FU). Cisplatin plus 5-FU chemotherapy showed a satisfactory efficacy and acceptable toxicity profile compared with CDDP + VP16, with caution to patients with a cardiac or vascular history. Although we could not show a benefit in survival with the CDDP + 5-FU protocol, this trial supports literature data and confirms that this regimen may be proposed as a first-line therapy in advanced cancer of the head and neck. Uncontrolled studies have reported encouraging outcomes for patients with high-risk primary breast cancer treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell support. We conducted a prospective randomized trial to compare standard-dose chemotherapy with the same therapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy. PATIENTS and
                Patients with 10 or more positive axillary lymph nodes after primary breast surgery or patients with four or more positive lymph nodes after four cycles of primary (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy were eligible. All patients were to receive eight cycles of 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin (Adriamycin), and cyclophosphamide (FAC). Patients were stratified by stage and randomly assigned to receive two cycles of high-dose cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin with autologous hematopoietic stem cell support or no additional chemotherapy. Tamoxifen was planned for postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor-positive tumors and chest wall radiotherapy was planned for all. All P values are from two-sided tests.
                Seventy-eight patients (48 after primary surgery and 30 after primary chemotherapy) were registered. Thirty-nine patients were randomly assigned to FAC and 39 to FAC followed by high-dose chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 6.5 years, there have been 41 relapses. In intention-to-treat analyses, estimated 3-year relapse-free survival rates were 62% and 48% for FAC and FAC/high-dose chemotherapy, respectively (P =.35), and 3-year survival rates were 77% and 58%, respectively (P =.23). Overall, there was greater and more frequent morbidity associated with high-dose chemotherapy than with FAC; there was one septic death associated with high-dose chemotherapy.
                No relapse-free or overall survival advantage was associated with the use of high-dose chemotherapy, and morbidity was increased with its use. Thus, high-dose chemotherapy is not indicated outside a clinical trial. The purpose of the present study was to determine the safety and efficacy of induction chemotherapy followed by concomitant chemoradiotherapy. Thirty-eight patients were randomised to receive induction chemotherapy, consisting of cyclophosphamide and methotrexate followed by concomitant 5-fluorouracil and irradiation (study group) or irradiation alone (control group). There were non-significant differences in the initial tumor clearance rates in the two groups. Median disease-free survival (in complete responders) was 17 months (6-60+) vs 11 months (5-60+) (p = 0.407) and overall survival 11 months (1-60+) vs 14 months (2-60+) (p = 0.428) in the study and control groups respectively. Acute morbidity and deaths during intervention were higher in the study group (p = 0.007). This study suggests that induction along with concomitant chemoradiotherapy is too toxic for routine use and also fails to provide a survival benefit.
Platinum-based chemotherapy regimens did not offer a statistically significant benefit in survival or overall tumour response compared with non-platinum-based regimens. However, platinum-based chemotherapy regimens did increase complete response rates, at the cost of higher adverse events including nausea and vomiting, anaemia and thrombocytopenia toxicity. These data suggest non-platinum chemotherapy regimens have a more advantageous risk-benefit profile. This systematic review highlights the lack of quality of life data in trials involving chemotherapy treatment for SCLC. With poor long-term survival associated with both treatment groups, the issue of the quality of the survival period takes on even more significance. It would be beneficial for future trials in this area to include a quality of life assessment.