Masaaki Kawahara

PURPOSE: A phase III study was performed to determine whether concurrent or sequential treatment with radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CT) improves survival in unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were assigned to the two treatment arms. In the concurrent arm, chemotherapy consisted of cisplatin (80 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 29), vindesine (3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 29, and 36), and mitomycin (8 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 29). RT began on day 2 at a dose of 28 Gy (2 Gy per fraction and 5 fractions per week for a total of 14 fractions) followed by a rest period of 10 days, and then repeated. In the sequential arm, the same CT was given, but RT was initiated after completing CT and consisted of 56 Gy (2 Gy per fraction and 5 fractions per week for a total of 28 fractions). RESULTS: Three hundred twenty patients were entered onto the study. Pretreatment characteristics were well balanced between the treatment arms. The response rate for the concurrent arm was significantly higher (84. 0%) than that of the sequential arm (66%) (P =.0002). The median survival duration was significantly superior in patients receiving concurrent therapy (16.5 months), as compared with those receiving sequential therapy (13.3 months) (P =.03998). Two-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year survival rates in the concurrent group (34.6%, 22.3%, 16.9%, and 15.8%, respectively) were better than those in the sequential group (27.4%, 14.7%, 10.1%, and 8.9%, respectively). Myelosuppression was significantly greater among patients on the concurrent arm than on the sequential arm (P =.0001). CONCLUSION: In selected patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC, the concurrent approach yields a significantly increased response rate and enhanced median survival duration when compared with the sequential approach.

BACKGROUND: Irinotecan hydrochloride, a topoisomerase I inhibitor, is effective against small-cell lung cancer. In a phase 2 study of irinotecan plus cisplatin in patients with extensive small-cell lung cancer, there was a high response rate and a promising median survival time. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, phase 3 study in which we compared irinotecan plus cisplatin with etoposide plus cisplatin in patients with extensive (metastatic) small-cell lung cancer. RESULTS: The planned size of the study population was 230 patients, but enrollment was terminated early because an interim analysis found a statistically significant difference in survival between the patients assigned to receive irinotecan and cisplatin and those assigned to receive etoposide and cisplatin; as a result, only 154 patients were enrolled. The median survival was 12.8 months in the irinotecan-plus-cisplatin group and 9.4 months in the etoposide-plus-cisplatin group (P=0.002 by the unadjusted log-rank test). At two years, the proportion of patients surviving was 19.5 percent in the irinotecan-plus-cisplatin group and 5.2 percent in the etoposide-plus-cisplatin group. Severe or life-threatening myelosuppression was more frequent in the etoposide-plus-cisplatin group than in the irinotecan-plus-cisplatin group, and severe or life-threatening diarrhea was more frequent in the irinotecan-plus-cisplatin group than in the etoposide-plus-cisplatin group. CONCLUSIONS: Irinotecan plus cisplatin is an effective treatment for metastatic small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the optimal timing for thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC), the Lung Cancer Study Group of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group conducted a phase III study in which patients were randomized to sequential TRT or concurrent TRT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We treated 231 patients with LS-SCLC. TRT consisted of 45 Gy over 3 weeks (1.5 Gy twice daily), and the patients were randomly assigned to receive either sequential or concurrent TRT. All patients received four cycles of cisplatin plus etoposide every 3 weeks (sequential arm) or 4 weeks (concurrent arm). TRT was begun on day 2 of the first cycle of chemotherapy in the concurrent arm and after the fourth cycle in the sequential arm. RESULTS: Concurrent radiotherapy yielded better survival than sequential radiotherapy (P =.097 by log-rank test). The median survival time was 19.7 months in the sequential arm versus 27.2 months in the concurrent arm. The 2-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates for patients who received sequential radiotherapy were 35.1%, 20.2%, and 18.3%, respectively, as opposed to 54.4%, 29.8% and 23.7%, respectively, for the patients who received concurrent radiotherapy. Hematologic toxicity was more severe in the concurrent arm. However, severe esophagitis was infrequent in both arms, occurring in 9% of the patients in the concurrent arm and 4% in the sequential arm. CONCLUSION: This study strongly suggests that cisplatin plus etoposide and concurrent radiotherapy is more effective for the treatment of LS-SCLC than cisplatin plus etoposide and sequential radiotherapy.