ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2015
Retrospective study of irinotecan/cisplatin followed by etoposide/cisplatin or the reverse sequence in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.
Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Initial management of small-cell lung cancer (limited- and extensive-stage) and the role of thoracic radiotherapy and first-line chemotherapy: a systematic review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2019Pooled it
- Real-world effectiveness and tolerability of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) treatments: A systematic literature review (SLR).PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Factors affecting survival and prognosis in extensive stage small cell lung cancer.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Article
- A Review on Mechanistic Insight of Plant Derived Anticancer Bioactive Phytocompounds and Their Structure Activity Relationship.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the esophagus with an adenocarcinoma component.Clinical journal of gastroenterology · 2019Article
- C-reactive protein is a significant predictor of improved survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Medicine · 2019Article
- Anticancer Activity of Natural Compounds from Plant and Marine Environment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Review
- Benefit from thoracic radiotherapy in patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer with elevated lactate dehydrogenase.OncoTargets and therapy · 2016Article
- The relationship between UGT1A1 gene polymorphism and irinotecan effect on extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer.OncoTargets and therapy · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMuch research has confirmed the favorable effect of irinotecan/cisplatin (IP) and etoposide/cisplatin (EP) on extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (E-SCLC). This study investigated two sequential orders of IP and EP in the treatment of E-SCLC. We also compared the efficacy and safety of IP and EP in first-line chemotherapy in E-SCLC.
methodsNinety-three untreated patients with E-SCLC were randomly allocated to two groups. Group A received IP as first-line therapy until progression and then changed to EP; group B received EP as first-line therapy until tumor progression followed by IP. The primary endpoints were overall survival and time to second tumor progression. The secondary endpoints were first progression-free survival (PFS), ie, time from randomization to first occurrence of tumor progression after first-line treatment with IP or EP, tumor response, and safety of the different sequential treatment orders of IP and EP.
resultsMedian overall survival was 15.4 months in group A (IP followed by EP) versus 15.7 months in group B (EP followed by IP; P=0.483). The median time to second tumor progression was 9.5 months in group A versus 9.9 months in group B (P=0.361). As first-line and second-line therapy, IP achieved a 95.9% and 60% disease control rate, respectively, and EP achieved 95.6% and 59% disease control rate. The median first PFS was not significantly different between group A and group B (6.5 months and 6.3 months, respectively; P=0.256). Grade 3/4 diarrhea appeared to be significantly more frequent with IP than with EP. The probability of anemia and thrombocytopenia was not significantly different between the two groups. However, significantly more patients who received the IP regimen as second-line treatment developed grade 3/4 neutropenia than those who received the IP regimen as first-line therapy.
conclusionThere were no statistically significant differences in between the two sequences of IP and EP in the treatment of E-SCLC. Except EP regimen, IP may be another reserved regimen in the first-line treatment of E-SCLC.
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.