Virtual Library

Start Your Search

R. Saught



Author of

  • +

    ORAL 10 - SCLC (ID 98)

    • Event: WCLC 2015
    • Type: Oral Session
    • Track: Small Cell Lung Cancer
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      ORAL10.02 - A Prospective Randomized Phase III Study of Continuum Chemotherapy versus Chemo-Radiotherapy in ES-SCLC in Asian Indian (ID 2854)

      10:45 - 12:15  |  Author(s): R. Saught

      • Abstract

      Background:
      Selected patients with good responses to platinum based chemotherapy and good performance status were candidates for continuum platinum based chemotherapy versus chemo-radiotherapy in Extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of continuum platinum based chemotherapy versus chemo-radiotherapy in ES-SCLC in Asian Indian patient population.

      Methods:
      Between July 2008 and December 2009, 358 patients with ES-SCLC treated with induction Cisplatin (60-80mg/m2 d1) + Etoposide (80-120 mg/m2 d1-3) × 3 cycles for every 3 weeks. Patients with CR at both local as well as distant sites or PR at the local site, but CR at distant sites were randomized 1:1 to two treatment groups (n=287). A total of 287 patients with response were randomized to accelerated hyperfraction thoracic RT (45Gy/1.5 Gy twice daily) plus PE × 4 (144) versus PE × 4 alone without radiation (n=143). The PE doses were similar as in induction. All patients received prophylactic cranial irradiation (25Gy/10 fraction/5/week). The primary endpoint was the comparison of progression free survival (PFS) between the two arms and the secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS). All statistical analyses were performed by using SPSS version 20.0.

      Results:
      Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Mean age was 58 years (range 32-69), 78% had ECOG 0-1; 22% ECOG 2. In the CRT arm 66.67% and in CT only arm 57.34% patients were smoker. Median PFS 15 months (CRT arm) versus 10 months (CT only) (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.56-1.18; p=0.06) and 5-year OS 10.3% (CRT arm) versus 6.2% (CT only) (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.29; p=0.47) respectively. The survival difference at 1 year was not statistically significant (39% vs 31%; HR=0.89, CI 0.69-1.13; p=0.091). The survival difference at 3 years was just significant (18% vs 11%; HR=0.83, CI 0.72-1.08; p=0.047). Local control trended better in CRT arm, but no difference in distant metastasis control in both arms.

      Conclusion:
      CRT arm showed better PFS and OS than CT only arm within Asian Indian patient population. Thus, the CRT may be used as a continuum treatment in Asian Indian patients of ES-SCLC after induction chemotherapy.