Comparison of gemcitabine and carboplatin versus cisplatin and etoposide for patients with poor-prognosis small cell lung cancer.

Background: The combination of cisplatin and etoposide (PE) has been a standard treatment for patients with poor-prognosis small cell lung cancer (SCLC). This noninferiority design trial aimed to determine whether the combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin (GC) results in similar survival but is less toxic with better quality of life. Methods: Previously untreated patients with SCLC with extensive disease or limited stage with poor prognostic factors were randomly assigned to six 3-weekly cycles of GC or PE. Results: 241 patients (121 GC, 120 PE) were recruited, of which 216 (90%) had died. There was no difference in overall survival (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.32). Median survival with GC and PE was 8.0 and 8.1 months, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 5.9 months with GC and 6.3 months with PE. Grade 3 or 4 myelosuppressions were more frequent with GC (anaemia: 14% GC vs 2% PE; leucopenia: 32% GC vs 13% PE; thrombocytopenia: 22% GC vs 4% PE), but these were not associated with increased hospital admissions, infections or fatalities. Grade 2-3 alopecia (68% PE vs 17% GC) and nausea (43% PE vs 26% GC) were more frequent with PE. Patients given GC received more chemotherapy as outpatients (89% GC vs 66% PE of treatment cycles). In QoL questionnaires, more patients receiving PE reported being upset by hair loss (p = 0.004) and impaired cognitive functioning (p = 0.04). Conclusions: GC is as effective as PE in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival and has a toxicity profile more acceptable to patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]