Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10493279›Full record

ReviewDrugs1999

Topotecan: a review of its efficacy in small cell lung cancer.

D Ormrod, C M Spencer

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

D OrmrodAdis International Limited, Mairangi Bay, Auckland, New Zealand. demail@adis.co.nz
C M Spencer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledTopotecan, a water soluble semisynthetic derivative of camptothecin, has demonstrated antineoplastic activity in a wide range of cell culture and xenograft systems and is currently approved for second-line therapy in ovarian and small cell lung cancer (SCLC). The drug inhibits replication of rapidly dividing cells by disrupting the normal function of the nuclear enzyme topoisomerase I. The efficacy of topotecan is related to exposure time and the recommended regimen is 1.5 mg/m2 as a 30-minute intravenous infusion, daily for 5 days, repeated every 21 days. In phase II trials of topotecan in SCLC (usually with the 1.5mg/m2, 5 day regimen) the overall response rate in refractory patients (those who had relapsed < or =90 days after first-line therapy) was low at 2 to 11%, whereas in sensitive patients (those relapsing > or =90 days after first-line therapy) the overall response rate was 14 to 37%. Topotecan was compared with combined cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin(adriamycin)/vincristine (CAV) therapy in patients with relapsed, sensitive (relapsed > or =60 days after first-line therapy) SCLC. The response rates were 24.3% and 18.3% and, respectively, for the topotecan- and CAV-treated groups, and no significant differences were detected when primary efficacy endpoints (response rates and duration) were compared. However, the results of a symptom-specific questionnaire for SCLC did suggest that topotecan offered superior control of some symptoms. SCLC is usually treated with combinations of cytotoxic drugs, and topotecan is showing promise when partnered with paclitaxel and platinum compounds. The efficacy of an oral formulation of topotecan is also being investigated; preliminary results are encouraging and suggest similar efficacy to intravenous formulations, but with less frequent neutropenia. The tolerability and compliance advantages of oral topotecan may make this the route of choice in the future. Noncumulative anaemia, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia are the dose-limiting adverse effects associated with topotecan. CAV and topotecan therapy had similar suppressive effects on neutrophils in patients with SCLC, but the incidences of grade 3 or 4 anaemia and grade 4 thrombocytopenia were significantly higher in topotecan-treated patients. Non-haematological adverse events in SCLC patients treated with topotecan or CAV were similar and most were grade 1 or 2. Gastrointestinal disturbances were common in both groups, as were alopecia and fatigue.

conclusionsIn a large randomised comparative study, topotecan was as effective as CAV in treating relapsed SCLC. The response rate was modest and further comparative and drug-combination studies are required to accurately position topotecan within the schedule of available drugs used to treat SCLC, particularly in relation to first-line therapy. However, recurrent SCLC is extremely intractable to therapy and topotecan is a valuable extension to the limited range of treatment options for SCLC.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarcinoma, Small CellClinical Trials as TopicDrug Resistance, NeoplasmHumansIn Vitro TechniquesLung NeoplasmsTopotecanAntineoplastic AgentsTopotecan

Identifiers

PMID10493279
OpenAlexW2063136513

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.