Two randomized trials for alternating polychemotherapy of small cell lung cancer
Patients with small cell carcinoma of the lung (SCCL) were treated in two multicenter trials with different cytostatic drug regimens including ifosfamide. In the first randomized study, including 306 patients, alternating chemotherapy with VP 16, ifosfamide, vindesine (VPIV), adriamycin, cisplatinum...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology 1986, Vol.18 Suppl 2 (S2), p.S40-S44 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | S44 |
---|---|
container_issue | S2 |
container_start_page | S40 |
container_title | Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology |
container_volume | 18 Suppl 2 |
creator | Havemann, K Gropp, C Klapsing, J Viktor, N Holle, R Drings, P Manke, H G Hans, K Schroeder, M Heim, M |
description | Patients with small cell carcinoma of the lung (SCCL) were treated in two multicenter trials with different cytostatic drug regimens including ifosfamide. In the first randomized study, including 306 patients, alternating chemotherapy with VP 16, ifosfamide, vindesine (VPIV), adriamycin, cisplatinum, vincristine (APO), and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, CCNU (CMCC) was compared against standard treatment with ACO (adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine). It was shown that the alternating therapy resulted in a higher response rate (88% vs 78%) and a longer median survival time (11 months vs 10 months). Regarding toxicity, VPIV was similar to ACO, whereas APO and CMCC had more side-effects, leading to an increase in the number of drop-outs. In the second randomized study 144 patients were treated either with ifosfamide/VP 16 (IVP) or with cisplatinum/VP 16 (PVP). In the case of no further response, no change, or progression the induction therapy was changed to ACO. Interim analyses show that both regimens have similar therapeutic effects; but higher toxicity was observed in patients treated with cis-platinum/VP 16 than in patients treated with ifosfamide/VP 16. According to the response rate in patients treated with ACO after first-line therapy there was less cross-resistance of IVP than of PVP to ACO. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/BF00647450 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>pubmed_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1007_BF00647450</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3028663</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c156t-31573797ff5f767d2e7174f69ddea61575b09b8e0520b935a963f2600e28f7e93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkE1Lw0AURQdRaqxu3AuzFqJv8uYjWWppVSjooq7DJHljI0kmTFKk_nojLbq5d3EPd3EYuxZwJwDM_eMKQEsjFZywSEhMYkglnrIIUMpYGZDn7GIYPgFACsQZmyEkqdYYsbfNl-fBdpVv62-q-Bhq2wzc-cBtM1Lo7Fh3H7z3zb7cUuvHLQXb77l3fGht0_CSpmh2E1ParqRwyc7c9EBXx56z99Vys3iO169PL4uHdVwKpccYhTJoMuOcckabKiEjjHQ6qyqyehpVAVmREqgEigyVzTS6RANQkjpDGc7Z7eG3DH4YArm8D3Vrwz4XkP9ayf-tTPDNAe53RUvVH3rUgD9df1w6</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Two randomized trials for alternating polychemotherapy of small cell lung cancer</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Havemann, K ; Gropp, C ; Klapsing, J ; Viktor, N ; Holle, R ; Drings, P ; Manke, H G ; Hans, K ; Schroeder, M ; Heim, M</creator><creatorcontrib>Havemann, K ; Gropp, C ; Klapsing, J ; Viktor, N ; Holle, R ; Drings, P ; Manke, H G ; Hans, K ; Schroeder, M ; Heim, M</creatorcontrib><description>Patients with small cell carcinoma of the lung (SCCL) were treated in two multicenter trials with different cytostatic drug regimens including ifosfamide. In the first randomized study, including 306 patients, alternating chemotherapy with VP 16, ifosfamide, vindesine (VPIV), adriamycin, cisplatinum, vincristine (APO), and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, CCNU (CMCC) was compared against standard treatment with ACO (adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine). It was shown that the alternating therapy resulted in a higher response rate (88% vs 78%) and a longer median survival time (11 months vs 10 months). Regarding toxicity, VPIV was similar to ACO, whereas APO and CMCC had more side-effects, leading to an increase in the number of drop-outs. In the second randomized study 144 patients were treated either with ifosfamide/VP 16 (IVP) or with cisplatinum/VP 16 (PVP). In the case of no further response, no change, or progression the induction therapy was changed to ACO. Interim analyses show that both regimens have similar therapeutic effects; but higher toxicity was observed in patients treated with cis-platinum/VP 16 than in patients treated with ifosfamide/VP 16. According to the response rate in patients treated with ACO after first-line therapy there was less cross-resistance of IVP than of PVP to ACO.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0344-5704</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-0843</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/BF00647450</identifier><identifier>PMID: 3028663</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Germany</publisher><subject>Age Factors ; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols - administration & dosage ; Carcinoma, Small Cell - drug therapy ; Carcinoma, Small Cell - mortality ; Cisplatin - therapeutic use ; Clinical Trials as Topic ; Cyclophosphamide - therapeutic use ; Doxorubicin - therapeutic use ; Female ; Humans ; Ifosfamide - therapeutic use ; Lomustine - therapeutic use ; Lung Neoplasms - drug therapy ; Lung Neoplasms - mortality ; Methotrexate - therapeutic use ; Podophyllotoxin - therapeutic use ; Random Allocation ; Sex Factors ; Smoking ; Time Factors ; Vincristine - therapeutic use ; Vindesine - therapeutic use</subject><ispartof>Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology, 1986, Vol.18 Suppl 2 (S2), p.S40-S44</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c156t-31573797ff5f767d2e7174f69ddea61575b09b8e0520b935a963f2600e28f7e93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,4024,27923,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3028663$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Havemann, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gropp, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klapsing, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Viktor, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holle, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drings, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manke, H G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hans, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schroeder, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heim, M</creatorcontrib><title>Two randomized trials for alternating polychemotherapy of small cell lung cancer</title><title>Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology</title><addtitle>Cancer Chemother Pharmacol</addtitle><description>Patients with small cell carcinoma of the lung (SCCL) were treated in two multicenter trials with different cytostatic drug regimens including ifosfamide. In the first randomized study, including 306 patients, alternating chemotherapy with VP 16, ifosfamide, vindesine (VPIV), adriamycin, cisplatinum, vincristine (APO), and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, CCNU (CMCC) was compared against standard treatment with ACO (adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine). It was shown that the alternating therapy resulted in a higher response rate (88% vs 78%) and a longer median survival time (11 months vs 10 months). Regarding toxicity, VPIV was similar to ACO, whereas APO and CMCC had more side-effects, leading to an increase in the number of drop-outs. In the second randomized study 144 patients were treated either with ifosfamide/VP 16 (IVP) or with cisplatinum/VP 16 (PVP). In the case of no further response, no change, or progression the induction therapy was changed to ACO. Interim analyses show that both regimens have similar therapeutic effects; but higher toxicity was observed in patients treated with cis-platinum/VP 16 than in patients treated with ifosfamide/VP 16. According to the response rate in patients treated with ACO after first-line therapy there was less cross-resistance of IVP than of PVP to ACO.</description><subject>Age Factors</subject><subject>Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Small Cell - drug therapy</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Small Cell - mortality</subject><subject>Cisplatin - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Clinical Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Cyclophosphamide - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Doxorubicin - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Ifosfamide - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Lomustine - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Lung Neoplasms - drug therapy</subject><subject>Lung Neoplasms - mortality</subject><subject>Methotrexate - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Podophyllotoxin - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Random Allocation</subject><subject>Sex Factors</subject><subject>Smoking</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Vincristine - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Vindesine - therapeutic use</subject><issn>0344-5704</issn><issn>1432-0843</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1986</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkE1Lw0AURQdRaqxu3AuzFqJv8uYjWWppVSjooq7DJHljI0kmTFKk_nojLbq5d3EPd3EYuxZwJwDM_eMKQEsjFZywSEhMYkglnrIIUMpYGZDn7GIYPgFACsQZmyEkqdYYsbfNl-fBdpVv62-q-Bhq2wzc-cBtM1Lo7Fh3H7z3zb7cUuvHLQXb77l3fGht0_CSpmh2E1ParqRwyc7c9EBXx56z99Vys3iO169PL4uHdVwKpccYhTJoMuOcckabKiEjjHQ6qyqyehpVAVmREqgEigyVzTS6RANQkjpDGc7Z7eG3DH4YArm8D3Vrwz4XkP9ayf-tTPDNAe53RUvVH3rUgD9df1w6</recordid><startdate>1986</startdate><enddate>1986</enddate><creator>Havemann, K</creator><creator>Gropp, C</creator><creator>Klapsing, J</creator><creator>Viktor, N</creator><creator>Holle, R</creator><creator>Drings, P</creator><creator>Manke, H G</creator><creator>Hans, K</creator><creator>Schroeder, M</creator><creator>Heim, M</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>1986</creationdate><title>Two randomized trials for alternating polychemotherapy of small cell lung cancer</title><author>Havemann, K ; Gropp, C ; Klapsing, J ; Viktor, N ; Holle, R ; Drings, P ; Manke, H G ; Hans, K ; Schroeder, M ; Heim, M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c156t-31573797ff5f767d2e7174f69ddea61575b09b8e0520b935a963f2600e28f7e93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1986</creationdate><topic>Age Factors</topic><topic>Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Small Cell - drug therapy</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Small Cell - mortality</topic><topic>Cisplatin - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Clinical Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Cyclophosphamide - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Doxorubicin - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Ifosfamide - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Lomustine - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Lung Neoplasms - drug therapy</topic><topic>Lung Neoplasms - mortality</topic><topic>Methotrexate - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Podophyllotoxin - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Random Allocation</topic><topic>Sex Factors</topic><topic>Smoking</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Vincristine - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Vindesine - therapeutic use</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Havemann, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gropp, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klapsing, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Viktor, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holle, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drings, P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manke, H G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hans, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schroeder, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heim, M</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Havemann, K</au><au>Gropp, C</au><au>Klapsing, J</au><au>Viktor, N</au><au>Holle, R</au><au>Drings, P</au><au>Manke, H G</au><au>Hans, K</au><au>Schroeder, M</au><au>Heim, M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Two randomized trials for alternating polychemotherapy of small cell lung cancer</atitle><jtitle>Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology</jtitle><addtitle>Cancer Chemother Pharmacol</addtitle><date>1986</date><risdate>1986</risdate><volume>18 Suppl 2</volume><issue>S2</issue><spage>S40</spage><epage>S44</epage><pages>S40-S44</pages><issn>0344-5704</issn><eissn>1432-0843</eissn><abstract>Patients with small cell carcinoma of the lung (SCCL) were treated in two multicenter trials with different cytostatic drug regimens including ifosfamide. In the first randomized study, including 306 patients, alternating chemotherapy with VP 16, ifosfamide, vindesine (VPIV), adriamycin, cisplatinum, vincristine (APO), and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, CCNU (CMCC) was compared against standard treatment with ACO (adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine). It was shown that the alternating therapy resulted in a higher response rate (88% vs 78%) and a longer median survival time (11 months vs 10 months). Regarding toxicity, VPIV was similar to ACO, whereas APO and CMCC had more side-effects, leading to an increase in the number of drop-outs. In the second randomized study 144 patients were treated either with ifosfamide/VP 16 (IVP) or with cisplatinum/VP 16 (PVP). In the case of no further response, no change, or progression the induction therapy was changed to ACO. Interim analyses show that both regimens have similar therapeutic effects; but higher toxicity was observed in patients treated with cis-platinum/VP 16 than in patients treated with ifosfamide/VP 16. According to the response rate in patients treated with ACO after first-line therapy there was less cross-resistance of IVP than of PVP to ACO.</abstract><cop>Germany</cop><pmid>3028663</pmid><doi>10.1007/BF00647450</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0344-5704 |
ispartof | Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology, 1986, Vol.18 Suppl 2 (S2), p.S40-S44 |
issn | 0344-5704 1432-0843 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1007_BF00647450 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals |
subjects | Age Factors Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols - administration & dosage Carcinoma, Small Cell - drug therapy Carcinoma, Small Cell - mortality Cisplatin - therapeutic use Clinical Trials as Topic Cyclophosphamide - therapeutic use Doxorubicin - therapeutic use Female Humans Ifosfamide - therapeutic use Lomustine - therapeutic use Lung Neoplasms - drug therapy Lung Neoplasms - mortality Methotrexate - therapeutic use Podophyllotoxin - therapeutic use Random Allocation Sex Factors Smoking Time Factors Vincristine - therapeutic use Vindesine - therapeutic use |
title | Two randomized trials for alternating polychemotherapy of small cell lung cancer |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T02%3A33%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pubmed_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Two%20randomized%20trials%20for%20alternating%20polychemotherapy%20of%20small%20cell%20lung%20cancer&rft.jtitle=Cancer%20chemotherapy%20and%20pharmacology&rft.au=Havemann,%20K&rft.date=1986&rft.volume=18%20Suppl%202&rft.issue=S2&rft.spage=S40&rft.epage=S44&rft.pages=S40-S44&rft.issn=0344-5704&rft.eissn=1432-0843&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/BF00647450&rft_dat=%3Cpubmed_cross%3E3028663%3C/pubmed_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/3028663&rfr_iscdi=true |