Abstract
The optimal chemotherapy regimen to use with radiotherapy in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer is unknown. Here, we compare the outcome of patents treated within the Veterans Health Administration with either etoposide-cisplatin (EP) or carboplatin-paclitaxel (CP). We identified patients treated with EP and CP with concurrent radiotherapy from 2001 to 2010. Survival rates were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression models with adjustments for confounding provided by propensity score methods and an instrumental variables analysis. Comorbidities and treatment complications were identified through administrative data. A total of 1,842 patients were included; EP was used in 27% (n = 499). Treatment with EP was not associated with a survival advantage in a Cox proportional hazards model (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.10), a propensity score matched cohort (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.24), or a propensity score adjusted model (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.10). In an instrumental variables analysis, there was no survival advantage for patients treated in centers where EP was used more than 50% of the time as compared with centers where EP was used in less than 10% of the patients (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.26). Patients treated with EP, compared with patients treated with CP, had more hospitalizations (2.4 v 1.7 hospitalizations, respectively; P < .001), outpatient visits (17.6 v 12.6 visits, respectively; P < .001), infectious complications (47.3% v 39.4%, respectively; P = .0022), acute kidney disease/dehydration (30.5% v 21.2%, respectively; P < .001), and mucositis/esophagitis (18.6% v 14.4%, respectively; P = .0246). After accounting for prognostic variables, patients treated with EP versus CP had similar overall survival, but EP was associated with increased morbidity.
Highlights
One in four patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has stage III disease at presentation.[1]
Treatment with EP was not associated with a survival advantage in a Cox proportional hazards model, a propensity score matched cohort (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.24), or a propensity score adjusted model (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.10)
In an instrumental variables analysis, there was no survival advantage for patients treated in centers where EP was used more than 50% of the time as compared with centers where EP was used in less than 10% of the patients (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.26)
Summary
One in four patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has stage III disease at presentation.[1] The outcome of these patients remains poor, with median survival times of only 15.3 to 21.7 months.[2,3,4] approximately 20% of patients achieve durable disease control, arguing for treatment with curative intent in those able to tolerate aggressive therapy.[1,5]. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated that concurrent chemoradiotherapy improves overall survival (OS) but increases toxicity, compared with sequential chemoradiotherapy.[2,6] Such chemotherapy generally involves a platinum doublet; no large RCT directly compares specific combinations in this setting.[2,7].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
