VP-16, ifosfamide and cisplatin (VIP) for extensive small cell lung cancer

Benefit from ifosfamide treatment in small-cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis

This study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of ifosfamide plus etoposide plus platinum (IEP) to that of etoposide plus platinum (EP) in patients with previously untreated small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). The Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE and Chinese Biomedical Literature databases were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials comparing IEP to EP in patients with histologically proven SCLC. Two investigators independently assessed the quality of the relevant trials and extracted data. We analyzed the data using Review Manager software, version 4.2.8. A total of 4 trials with 447 previously untreated SCLC patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that there were no significant differences in the overall response [relative risk (RR) = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.97-1.19], 1-year survival rate (RR=1.22, 95% CI: 0.96-1.55) and 2-year survival rate (RR=1.52, 95% CI: 0.75-3.07) between the IEP and EP regimens. However, there were significant differences between the IEP and EP regimens regarding the incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia (RR=1.52, 95% CI: 1.07-2.17) and grade 3/4 vomiting (RR=1.78, 95% CI: 1.02-3.11). In conclusion, our results suggested that IEP is not superior to EP regimen for the treatment of previously untreated SCLC, whereas the IEP regimen is associated with more severe hematological and gastrointestinal toxicities compared to EP. Therefore, the use of ifosfamide in multimodality treatment regimens requires further investigation.

Chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer: a comprehensive review

Combination chemotherapy is the current strategy of choice for treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Platinum containing combination regimens are superior to non-platinum regimens in limited stage-SCLC and possibly also in extensive stage-SCLC as first and second-line treatments. The addition of ifosfamide to platinum containing regimens may improve the outcome but at the price of increased toxicity. Suboptimal doses of chemotherapy result in inferior survival. Early intensified, accelerated and high-dose chemotherapy gave conflicting results and is not considered a standard option outside of clinical trials. A number of newer agents have provided promising results when used in combination regimens, for example, gemcitabine, irinotecan and topotecan. However, more studies are required to appropriately evaluate them. There is a definitive role for radiotherapy in LD-SCLC. However, timing and schedule are subject to further research. Novel approaches are currently being investigated in the hope of improving outcome.

Combination chemotherapy with paclitaxel and ifosfamide as the third-line regimen in patients with heavily pretreated small cell lung cancer

The efficacy of salvage regimens for small cell lung cancer remains to be established. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of the paclitaxel and ifosfamide (PI) combination chemotherapy salvage regimen in heavily pretreated small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients. Thirty-five patients who had received more than two prior chemotherapy regimens were treated with PI chemotherapy. Paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)) was administered on day 1 and ifosfamide (2500 mg/m(2)) on day 1-2 every 3 weeks. Thirty-three patients were available for treatment response evaluation. Median age was 63 years (range, 40-78) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance scores of 0/1/2 were 29.4%, 61.8%, and 11.8%, respectively. A median of 2 cycles (range, 1-6) of chemotherapy were administered. The overall response rate (RR) in the intent-to-treat population was 20.0% (95% Confidence Interval (CI), 6.7-33.3%) with 7 partial responses (PR) and no complete response (CR). Patients who responded to previous chemotherapy just before PI showed significantly higher RR than non-responders (RR, 57.1% versus 10.7%, P=.023). After a median follow-up of 8.8 months (range, 1.6-14.7), the median time to progression was 3.3 months (95% CI, 2.3-4.4) and the median overall survival was 7.6 months (95% CI, 6.7-8.5). The most common toxicity observed was mild nausea/vomiting and grade 3/4 adverse events were observed in 4 (11.4%) patients. There were no treatment-related deaths in the study. Our findings suggest that salvage PI chemotherapy is a feasible and well tolerated regimen for previously treated SCLC patients. Further studies are warranted to define the effects of PI chemotherapy on quality of life and survival benefits.

Chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer

There were approximately 42,000 new cases of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in 2002. Despite its initial sensitivity to chemotherapy, only 10% of all SCLC patients will have significant long-term survival. Studies have yet to show significant survival advantages for maintenance chemotherapy, and it appears that four to six cycles of chemotherapy is as effective as longer durations. As yet, there is no defined role for dose escalation in the treatment of SCLC. No one chemotherapy combination has exhibited a definitive survival advantage in extensive disease, although it appears that single-agent oral etoposide may be inferior to combination intravenous chemotherapy. In limited disease, however, cisplatin plus etoposide alone or in alternation with cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine is superior to other approaches. There are several new agents with significant activity in SCLC awaiting further study.

Paclitaxel added to the cisplatin/etoposide regimen in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer -- the use of complete response rate as the primary endpoint in phase II trials

Obtaining a complete response (CR) is the most powerful predictor of survival in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Improvements in long-term survival in extensive-stage SCLC can be made if the proportion of complete responders to induction therapy can be increased. We performed a phase II trial of the feasibility of adding paclitaxel to standard cisplatin/etoposide (EP regimen) in extensive-stage SCLC. The primary endpoint for this trial is the proportion of patients (pts) obtaining a CR rather than overall response. The null hypothesis for this trial consists of the absence of a CR rate >20%. Paclitaxel was given at doses of 135 (3 pts) or 170 mg/m(2) i.v. over 3 h on day 1. Cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) was given on day 1. On days 1-3 etoposide 80 mg/m(2) per day i.v. was given. G-CSF was used from days 5 to 14 of each cycle. Cycles were repeated q21 days. A two-stage design was used for patient accrual, based on the occurrence of complete responses. Initially, 16 patients were to be accrued. If more than three complete responses were to occur, a further 20 patients would be accrued to the study (Simon's optimal two stage design). Sixteen patients were enrolled. Two patients had a CR (13%) and nine patients had a partial response (56%) for an overall response rate of 69%. The trial was suspended due to the low CR rate. Review of the literature for paclitaxel based front-line treatment combined with EP therapy, in extensive stage SCLC, consistently shows a CR rate <20% but high overall response rate is maintained (thus most responses are partial). As virtually all long-term survivors in extensive-disease SCLC have had a CR to induction therapy and CR remains the strongest predictor of survival for this disease, this may suggest that paclitaxel added to standard EP may improve progression-free survival (and possibly median survival) but is unlikely to significantly improve long-term survival. Initial randomized phase III data confirm the absence of impact on survival for this triple-drug regimen compared to EP therapy alone. Furthermore, other regimens comparing favorably to the EP regimen have all shown consistent CR rates >20% in the phase II setting. In conclusion, consideration should be given to the use of CR rate as a phase II endpoint to determine if a particular regimen should be compared to the standard in a phase III setting for extensive-stage SCLC. A two-stage phase II design based on a minimum required completed responses for further patient accrual is recommended.