We have located links that may give you full text access.
A randomised phase II clinical trial of nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin compared with gemcitabine and carboplatin as first-line therapy in advanced squamous cell lung carcinoma (C-TONG1002).
European Journal of Cancer 2019 March
BACKGROUND: Nab-paclitaxel/carboplatin (nab-PC) and gemcitabine/carboplatin (GC) are the standard first-line chemotherapy in non-small cell lung carcinoma. Up to now, there is no head to head trial to compare nab-PC with GC in advanced squamous cell lung carcinoma.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicentre randomised phase II trial was performed to compare the efficacy and safety for nab-PC with GC in previously untreated patients with advanced squamous cell lung carcinoma. The primary end-point was objective response rate (ORR). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), treatment-related adverse events and quality of life (QoL) were also analysed.
RESULTS: Totally 127 participants were eligible for this study (62/65 nab-PC/GC). Nab-PC has higher ORR than GC without statistical significance (42% versus 27%, P > 0.05). After a median follow-up of 14.5 months, both PFS and OS had no difference between the two arms (6.7 versus 5.8 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.75, P = 0.143; 11.6 versus 14.4 months, HR 0.92, P = 0.846). Both regimens were well tolerated; however, more dose reduction occurred after cycle 2 in GC (27%) than in nab-PC (12%) (P < 0.05). Significant QoL improvement measured by trial outcome index was seen in nab-PC than in GC (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The first-line nab-PC and GC had the same response, PFS, and OS in patients with advanced squamous cell lung carcinoma. Nab-PCM has advantage over GC in QoL improvement.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01236716.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicentre randomised phase II trial was performed to compare the efficacy and safety for nab-PC with GC in previously untreated patients with advanced squamous cell lung carcinoma. The primary end-point was objective response rate (ORR). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), treatment-related adverse events and quality of life (QoL) were also analysed.
RESULTS: Totally 127 participants were eligible for this study (62/65 nab-PC/GC). Nab-PC has higher ORR than GC without statistical significance (42% versus 27%, P > 0.05). After a median follow-up of 14.5 months, both PFS and OS had no difference between the two arms (6.7 versus 5.8 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.75, P = 0.143; 11.6 versus 14.4 months, HR 0.92, P = 0.846). Both regimens were well tolerated; however, more dose reduction occurred after cycle 2 in GC (27%) than in nab-PC (12%) (P < 0.05). Significant QoL improvement measured by trial outcome index was seen in nab-PC than in GC (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The first-line nab-PC and GC had the same response, PFS, and OS in patients with advanced squamous cell lung carcinoma. Nab-PCM has advantage over GC in QoL improvement.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01236716.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app