ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2015
Cisplatin and etoposide versus carboplatin and paclitaxel with concurrent radiotherapy for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: an analysis of Veterans Health Administration data.
Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
50 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 127 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- A Dose-finding Study Followed by a Phase II Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial of Chemoradiotherapy With or Without Veliparib in Stage III Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: SWOG 1206 (8811).Clinical lung cancer · 2021Trial
- Comparing Paclitaxel Plus Fluorouracil Versus Cisplatin Plus Fluorouracil in Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer: A Randomized, Multicenter, Phase III Clinical Trial.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2019Trial
- Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Concurrent Chemoradiation Followed or Not by Consolidation Chemotherapy: A Survival Analysis From a Brazilian Multicentric Cohort.Journal of global oncology · 2018Trial
- Treatment Design and Rationale for a Randomized Trial of Cisplatin and Etoposide Plus Thoracic Radiotherapy Followed by Nivolumab or Placebo for Locally Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (RTOG 3505).Clinical lung cancer · 2017Trial
- Article
- Biweekly carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel with concurrent radiotherapy followed by durvalumab consolidation for unresectable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a real-world retrospective cohort study.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- LFC-Lab on a chip · 2026Article
- Induction chemotherapy administration increases the risk of radiation pneumonitis in unresectable stage III NSCLC patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiotherapy with immunotherapy.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2026Article
- Long-term outcome of definitive radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A real-world single-center study in the pre-durvalumab era.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- A Single-Center Experience in Combined Oncological-Surgical Treatment for Resectable Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Update on the Management of Stage III NSCLC: Navigating a Complex and Heterogeneous Stage of Disease.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
- Older Patients with Lung Cancer: a Summary of Seminal Contributions to Optimal Patient Care.Current oncology reports · 2022Review
- Human Lactoferrin Synergizes with Etoposide to Inhibit Lung Adenocarcinoma Cell Growth While Attenuating Etoposide-Mediated Cytotoxicity of Human Endothelial Cells.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- Article
- A phase II study of S-1 and cisplatin with concurrent thoracic radiotherapy followed by durvalumab for unresectable, locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in Japan (SAMURAI study): primary analysis.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2022Article
- Chemoradiation treatment patterns among United States Veteran Health Administration patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Saponins in Cancer Treatment: Current Progress and Future Prospects.Pathophysiology : the official journal of the International Society for Pathophysiology · 2021Review
- A Review of Immunotherapy for Stage III and Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and the Rationale for the ECOG-ACRIN EA5181 Study.The oncologist · 2021Review
- Effect of Intraoperative Imprint Cytology Followed by Frozen Section on Margin Assessment in Breast-Conserving Surgery.Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe optimal chemotherapy regimen to use with radiotherapy in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer is unknown. Here, we compare the outcome of patents treated within the Veterans Health Administration with either etoposide-cisplatin (EP) or carboplatin-paclitaxel (CP).
methodsWe identified patients treated with EP and CP with concurrent radiotherapy from 2001 to 2010. Survival rates were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression models with adjustments for confounding provided by propensity score methods and an instrumental variables analysis. Comorbidities and treatment complications were identified through administrative data.
resultsA total of 1,842 patients were included; EP was used in 27% (n = 499). Treatment with EP was not associated with a survival advantage in a Cox proportional hazards model (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.10), a propensity score matched cohort (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.24), or a propensity score adjusted model (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.10). In an instrumental variables analysis, there was no survival advantage for patients treated in centers where EP was used more than 50% of the time as compared with centers where EP was used in less than 10% of the patients (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.26). Patients treated with EP, compared with patients treated with CP, had more hospitalizations (2.4 v 1.7 hospitalizations, respectively; P < .001), outpatient visits (17.6 v 12.6 visits, respectively; P < .001), infectious complications (47.3% v 39.4%, respectively; P = .0022), acute kidney disease/dehydration (30.5% v 21.2%, respectively; P < .001), and mucositis/esophagitis (18.6% v 14.4%, respectively; P = .0246).
conclusionAfter accounting for prognostic variables, patients treated with EP versus CP had similar overall survival, but EP was associated with increased morbidity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.