Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2007 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings (Post-Meeting Edition).
Vol 25, No 18S (June 20 Supplement), 2007: 7523
© 2007 American Society of Clinical Oncology

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hermes, A. Articles by Sörenson, S. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Hermes, A. Articles by Sörenson, S.

Abstract

A randomized phase III trial of irinotecan plus carboplatin versus etoposide plus carboplatin in patients with small cell lung cancer, extensive disease (SCLC-ED): IRIS-Study

Grosshansdorf Hospital, Grosshansdorf, Germany; Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway; University Hospital, Lund, Sweden; Haugesund Hospital, Haugesund, Norway; University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden; University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway; University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden; University Hospital, Tromsø, Norway

7523

Background: A Japanese randomized trial has shown superior survival for SCLC-ED patients receiving irinotecan+cisplatin as compared to etoposide+cisplatin. Our trial was performed to evaluate the effect of irinotecan+carboplatin compared to oral etoposide+carboplatin. Patients and Methods: In a phase III trial, patients with SCLC-ED were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin, AUC=4 (Chatelut formula) and irinotecan, 175 mg/m², both on day 1 (IC) or carboplatin (Chatelut AUC=4) on day 1 and etoposide 120 mg/m²/day, orally, on days 1–5 (EC). In both arms, courses were repeated on day 21 with 4 cycles planned. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), secondary endpoints were quality of life, evaluated by EORTC-QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC 13, and complete response rate. There were neither upper limits for age or performance status. Results: Between November, 2001 and July, 2005, 220 patients were randomized. 210 patients were eligible for analysis (other type of cancer, 8 pts., limited disease, 1 pt., elevated liver function tests, 1 pt.). Performance status (PS) 0: 20 patients, PS 1: 91, PS 2: 62, PS 3: 29, PS 4: 8. Median age IC was 67 years (46–81), EC 67 years (39–82). OS was 255 days (IC) versus 214 days (EC) (P=0.04, log rank test). HR for overall survival was 1.34, 95% CI: 1.01–1.79. 1-year survival was 35% vs 28%. CR was observed in 18 patients in the IC arm and 7 patients in the EC arm (P=0.02, chi-square test). There were no statistically significant differences with respect to haematological grade III-IV toxicity. No severe diarrhea was observed in the IC group. There were no significant differences regarding quality of life. Conclusion: Irinotecan + carboplatin is superior to oral etoposide + carboplatin with respect to overall survival in SCLC-ED.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Abstract presentation from the 2007 ASCO Annual Meeting