A randomized trial of hybrid administration of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and vincristine (CAV)/Cisplatin and etoposide (PVP) versus sequential administration of CAV-PVP for the treatment of patients with small cell lung carcinoma : Results of long term follow-up

✍ Scribed by Hiroshi Ueoka; Katsuyuki Kiura; Masahiro Tabata; Haruhito Kamei; Kenichi Gemba; Katsuyoshi Sakae; Yoshio Hiraki; Shunkichi Hiraki; Yoshihiko Segawa; Mine Harada

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 1998
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 101 KB
• Volume: 83
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0008-543X
• DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19980715)83:2<283::aid-cncr12>3.0.co;2-p

✦ Synopsis

BACKGROUND.

In an attempt to determine the efficacy of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and vincristine (CAV)/cisplatin and etoposide (PVP) hybrid chemotherapy (HYB), a rapidly alternating chemotherapy, in patients with small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC), the authors conducted a randomized study to compare HYB with CAV-PVP sequential chemotherapy (SEQ).

METHODS. Patients in the HYB

group received the 3-drug CAV combination on Day 1 and the 2-drug PVP combination on Day 8, repeated every 4 weeks for up to 6 cycles. Patients in the SEQ group received 3 cycles each of CAV and PVP sequentially every 4 weeks, delivered on Days 1 and 8. All responding patients with limited disease (LD) received thoracic irradiation (50 gray) after chemotherapy.

RESULTS.

Between April 1988 and October 1992, 129 patients were evaluated fully.

There were no significant differences in the treatment outcome between patients in the HYB and SEQ groups in terms of the complete response rate (59% for LD patients and 21% for extensive disease [ED] patients in the HYB group vs. 45% for LD patients and 16% for ED patients in the SEQ group), or median survival time (17.9 months for LD patients and 9.7 months for ED patients in the HYB group vs. 20.6 months for LD patients and 12.2 months for ED patients in the SEQ group).

CONCLUSIONS.

Hybrid CAV-PVP therapy is effective for the treatment of SCLC, but appears to be no better than sequential therapy with the same regimen. Cancer 1998;83:283-90.