ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To analyze the controversies surrounding therapeutic decision-making and the withholding of life- sustaining treatments, values held concerning therapeutic interventions of terminal cancer patients are compared between physicians and family members. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 42 advanced or terminal stage cancer patients were enrolled for the study. The questionnaires were administered to the duty doctor and the family of the patients. Questions included whether to use new agents with a 15% partial efficacy and whether to use opioid analgesics, intravenous nutrition, a feeding tube, antibiotics, and hemodialysis. Additionally, we asked about the administration of CPR, ventilator application, and euthanasia. If the family permitted, the same questionnaires were given to the patients. RESULTS: Of the 42 cases, 5 families refused to answer the questionnaire. Of the available 37 families, only 5 families permitted access to the patients. Of the 5 patients, 2 patients refused the questionnaire. Only 67.6% and 8.1% of families and the patients clearly understood the stage of cancer. The use of a new agent was accepted by 45.2% of the physicians and 45.9% of the families. The rankings of the acceptance of treatment in the physicians and in the families were similar. The concordance rate between the physicians and the families was lowest on ventilator application and CPR. 31% of the physicians and 43.2% of the families agreed on the issue of euthanasia. CONCLUSION: Values held on issues like therapeutic decision-making and the withholding of life-sustaining treatments in terminal cancer patients are discordant between physicians and family members. In order to resolve controversies on the role of physicians in end-of-life decisions, the values of physicians as well as patients and their family members should be considered in the final decision-making process.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Platinum-based chemotherapy has conferred a modest but significant survival benefit and the introduction of newer drugs has led to achieve higher response rate in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We performed a phase II trial in order to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of combination chemotherapy with vinorelbine (Navelbine) and cisplatin in advanced NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated, unresectable stage IIIB or IV NSCLC with measurable lesion (s) were eligible for entry into the study. NP chemotherapy consisted of intravenous vinorelbine 25 mg/m2, on day 1 and 8, and intravenous cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1; this cycle was repeated every three weeks. RESULTS: A total of 33 patients were enrolled in the study between July 1999 and Feb 2000. Of the 30 patients deemed eligible for analysis, thirteen patients achieved a partial response and thirteen showed a stable disease. The overall response rate was 43.3%. The median duration of response was 5.7 months (95% CI: 2.8~8.5 months). The median time to progression was 7.6 months (95% CI: 5.5~9.7 months) and the overall median survival time was 15.1 months (95% CI: 9.8~20.4 months) in the intent-to-treat analysis. Chemotherapy-related grade 3 or 4 toxicities were anemia in 1.5%, leukopenia in 4.5%, nausea/vomiting in 2.3%, alopecia in 13.3%, and neurotoxicity in 3.3%. CONCLUSION: The combination of vinorelbine and cisplatin chemotherapy seems to be active and fairly tolerable in patients with advanced NSCLC.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of combination chemotherapy with low-dose paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients with unresectable, pathologically proven non-small cell lung cancer were eligible for inclusion in the study. Patients received paclitaxel (145 mg/m2 iv 3 hour D1) and cisplatin (60 mg/m2 iv D1) every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were enrolled between February 2000 and February 2001. The median age was 53.5 years. Patients with adenocarcinoma numbered 29, squamous cell carcinoma 7, large cell carcinoma 3, and undifferentiated carcinoma 3. Seventeen patients had stage IIIB, 19 had stage IV disease and the remaining 6 displayed recurred disease after previous surgical resection. Four patients terminated treatment early because of hypersensitivity (1) and severe emesis (3). Of the 38 evaluable patients, 14 had PR and the response rate was 36.8%. Among partial responders, 6 patients received additional chest radiation. The median duration of response was 47.9 weeks and the median overall survival was 54.0 weeks. Of the total 176 courses, 14 were delayed, 22 required dose reduction, and grade 3~4 neutropenia occurred in 5.6% of courses. Only one episode of neutropenic fever developed and there were no treatment- related mortalities. Other toxicities were generally mild. CONCLUSION: The combination chemotherapy with low-dose paclitaxel and cisplatin was effective and tolerable in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
