Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Lung Cancer. 2009 Sep;65(3):339-44. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2008.11.019. Epub 2009 Jan 13.

A meta-analysis of platinum plus gemcitabine or vinorelbine in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Author information

1
Department of Oncology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

Whether platinum plus gemcitabine or vinorelbine are equally effective in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is still controversial, a meta-analysis was performed to compare the gemcitabine plus platinum with vinorelbine plus platinum regimens in first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC.

METHODS:

A literature search was performed in PubMed database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database, the Physician Data Query (PDQ) database, EMBASE and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meeting abstracts. The following keywords were used: "non small cell lung cancer," or "Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung". Reference lists of original articles and review articles were also examined. The published languages and years were not limited. The trials searched were evaluated for eligibility and quality, and then the data were abstracted and analyzed. Endpoints were overall survival, overall response, and toxicity. Statistical tests for heterogeneity were one-sided; statistical tests for effect estimates were two-sided.

RESULTS:

Nine randomized controlled trials involving 2186 patients were identified from 453 reports. They were all published as full-text articles. The intention-to-treatment (ITT) analysis demonstrated that the patients with gemcitabine plus platinum regimens had an equal overall response rate in comparison with vinorelbine plus platinum regimens (RR, 0.91; 95%CI, 0.81-1.03; P=0.15). Furthermore, the 1-year survival rate for the two platinum-based regimens were comparable (RR, 1.06; 95%CI, 0.96-1.18; P=0.27). Subgroup analysis comparing the cisplatin plus gemcitabine or vinorelbine had achieved the same results. Vinorelbine plus platinum regimens led to more frequent grade 3 or 4 of neutropenia, nephrotoxicity, constipation and phlebitis (OR, 0.37; 95%CI, 0.26-0.52; P<0.00001; OR, 0.38; 95%CI, 0.25-0.57; P<0.00001; OR, 0.50; 95%CI, 0.27-0.92; P=0.03 and OR, 0.13; 95%CI, 0.05-0.32; P<0.00001, respectively), while gemcitabine plus platinum chemotherapy inclined to developing more grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia (OR, 11.37; 95%CI, 4.56-28.38; P<0.00001). The incidence of grade 3 or 4 anemia, nausea and vomiting were almost comparable between the two arms (OR, 1.12; 95%CI, 0.62-2.02; P=0.71 and OR, 0.72; 95%CI, 0.41-1.28; P=0.27, respectively). Similar results were also achieved in subgroup analyses between the gemcitabine and vinorelbine in combination with the cisplatin.

CONCLUSION:

It could be concluded that the efficacy were similar between the platinum plus gemcitabine or vinorelbine regimens. The choice of platinum plus gemcitabine or vinorelbine depends on the toxicity of the drugs and patients' tolerance.

PMID:
19144444
DOI:
10.1016/j.lungcan.2008.11.019
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science Icon for PubMed Health
    Loading ...
    Support Center