ABSTRACT
Objective: To investigate whether combination chemotherapy with cisplatin, etoposide, and irinotecan was better than topotecan alone as second-line chemotherapy in patients with sensitive relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Method: Between September, 2014 and September, 2017, the patients'data were collected in Jilin Province Cancer Hospital. All patients were diagnosed with sensitive relapsed SCLC. Thirty-six patients received combination chemotherapy containing cisplatin plus etoposide plus irinotecan, and 42 patients received topotecan alone. Combination chemotherapy consisted of five 2-week courses of intravenous cisplatin 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, intravenous etoposide 60 mg/m2 on days 1-3, and intravenous irinotecan 90 mg/m2 on day 8. Topotecan therapy consisted of at least one course of intravenous topotecan 1.5 mg/m2 on days 1-5, every 3 weeks. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of drugs. Results: PFS was significantly longer in the combination chemotherapy group [median 5.3 months, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.3-5.8] than in the topotecan group (3.2 months, 95% CI: 2.7-4.0;P=0.0030); OS was also significantly increased in the combination chemotherapy group (median 16.3 months, 95% CI: 13.8-19.1) than in the topotecan group (13.1 months, 95% CI: 10.2-15.4; P=0.0097). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia [31 (86.1%) patients in the combination chemotherapy group vs. 28 (66.7%) patients in the topotecan group], anemia [26 (72.2%) vs. 10 (23.8%)], leucopenia [29 (80.6%) vs . 21 (50.0%)], and thrombocytopenia [13 (36.1%) vs . 11 (26.2%)]. One treatment-related death (febrile neutropenia with pulmonary infection) occurred in the combination chemotherapy group, and none occurred in the topotecan group. Conclusions:Combination chemotherapy with cisplatin plus etoposide plus irinotecan could be considered a treatment option in second-line che-motherapy for selected patients with sensitive relapsed SCLC. However, the combination chemotherapy group had a higher incidence of adverse events than the topotecan group, and appropriate drug dosages should be explored.
ABSTRACT
Objective To observe the clinical efficacy of irinotecan combined with capecitabine or tegafur-gimeracil-oteracil potassium in the second-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer. Methods The clinical data of 19 patients with advanced colorectal cancer who were admitted to the Cancer Hospital of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College from October 2014 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed, and these patients failed the first-line chemotherapy regimen. All patients were treated with irinotecan plus capecitabine or tegafur-gimeracil-oteracil potassium. The patient's short-term efficacy, adverse reactions, progression-free survival, and overall survival were analyzed. Results After treatment, the efficacy in 18 of the 19 patients with advanced colorectal cancer was evaluable, including partial remission in 3 patients, stable disease in 13 patients, and disease progression in 2 patients. The objective remission rate was 16.7％ (3/18), the disease control rate was 88.9％ (16/18), the median progression-free survival time was 7.6 months, and the median overall survival time was 23.3 months. All of the patients were well tolerated , and the grade 4 adverse reaction was presented as grade 4 neutropenia (1 case), grade 3 leukopenia (2 cases) and thrombocytopenia (1 case), grade 2 diarrhea (1 case), and grade 1 diarrhea (3 cases), and grade 1-2 liver injury (3 cases) and nephrotoxicity (2 cases). Conclusion Irinotecan combined with capecitabine or tegafur-gimeracil-oteracil potassium in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer is effective and safe, which is worthy of clinical promotion.
ABSTRACT
Objective To observe the clinical efficacy and safety of etoposide capsule (VP16) in the treatment of recurrent small cell lung cancer. Methods Retrospective analysis 39 patients,aged≥65, with relapsed small cell lung cancer, who were at least three months after the end of the first-line treatment since January 2012 to January 2014 in Tianjin fifth central hospital.Etoposide was administered by daily oral at 100 mg/day for seven consecutive days and withdraw for 14 days,21 days as a therapeutic cycle,repeat treatment until disease progression or intolerable side effects occur, analyze the progression-free survival and overall survival.Observe the clinical benefit rate,the overall response rate and safety.Results The clinical benefit rate (DCR) and overall response rate (ORR) after the treatment were 61.5% and 30.77%.The progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.8 months, and the overall survival (OS) was 7.3 months.Neutropenia is the most common toxicities, and grade Ⅲ or Ⅳ occurred in 7.7% of the patients.No grade Ⅲ or Ⅳ thrombocytopenia, or grade Ⅲ or Ⅳ non-hematologic toxicity was occured.Conclusion Etoposide oral capsules monotherapy may be considered as one of the safe and effective choice of the second-line treatment of elderly patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer.
ABSTRACT
Background and purpose:Single drug of docetaxel and pemetrexed as second line treatment is standard treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Whether combined with platinum can increase the response and survival is still not elucidated. This study was designed to investigate the treatment response, overall survival (OS) and the safety of combined with oxaliplatin or cisplatin regimens as second line in treating NSCLC patients. Methods:Advanced NSCLC inpatients, failure of cisplatin or carboplatin in initial treatment, were divided into three groups at random in 3∶2∶1 rate. Control group:who received docetaxel, 75 mg/m2 (for all patients), d1 or pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 (for non-squamous carcinoma);Cisplatin group:who received cisplatin 25 mg/m2, d1-3 and docetaxel/pemetrexed; Oxaliplatin group: who received oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 d1 and docetaxel/pemetrexed. Every 3 weeks were repeated as one cycle. The side effect was assessed every cycle and treatment efifcacy was investigated every two cycles. Follow-up examination was taken every 3 months after treatment. Results:There were no differences in treatment response, progress free survival (PFS), OS and toxicity among the three groups (P>0.05). Old patients (≥60 years) had a better PFS than that of patients less than 60 years (HR=0.56, 95%CI:0.35-0.90, P=0.015). Patients with performance score 0-1 had a better PFS and OS (HR=1.52, 95%CI:1.01-2.30, P=0.048;HR=1.90, 95%CI:1.17-3.09, P=0.009). Treatment response had relation to PFS and OS (HR=2.93, 95%CI:2.01-4.26, P=0.000;HR=2.03, 95%CI:1.37-3.01, P=0.000). Patients with anemia after treatment tended to have a worse PFS and OS (HR=1.59, 95%CI:0.97-2.61, P=0.066;HR=1.60, 95%CI:0.94-2.75, P=0.085). Patients with thrombocytopenia after therapy had a worse OS (HR=2.97, 95%CI:1.01-8.78, P=0.049). Patients with neural toxicity after chemotherapy tended to have a worse PFS (HR=3.36, 95%CI:0.92-12.25, P=0.066). Patients received post treatment after second line therapy had a better OS (HR=0.36, 95%CI:0.22-0.61, P=0.000). Conclusion:Combined with oxaliplatin or cisplatin as second line treatment can’t improve the response and survival in NSCLC patient. Treatment response and PS are prognostic factors to NSCLC patients’ PFS and OS. Patients with treatment related anemia might have a worse survival. Post therapy after failure to second line chemotherapy can prolong the survival.