Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38949235›Full record

ArticleBiomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacky, Olomouc, Czechoslovakia2025

Comparison of the efficacy of cisplatin and carboplatin in combination with etoposide in firstline treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer in real-world practice in the Czech Republic - a retrospective analysis of patients from the LUCAS project.

Alzbeta Bejckova, Miloslav Marel, Zdenka Chladkova, Libor Fila, Luis Fernando Casas-Mendez, Ondrej Venclicek, Petr Jakubec, Marketa Cernovska, Michal Hrnciarik, Jana Krejci and 2 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacky, Olomouc, Czechoslovakia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors.

Alzbeta BejckovaDepartment of Pulmonology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic.
Miloslav MarelDepartment of Pulmonology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic.
Zdenka ChladkovaDepartment of Pulmonology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic.
Libor FilaDepartment of Pulmonology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic.
Luis Fernando Casas-MendezDepartment of Pulmonology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic.
Ondrej VenclicekDepartment of Respiratory Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University and University Hospital, Brno, Czech Republic.
Petr JakubecDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, University Hospital Olomouc and Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
Marketa CernovskaDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Thomayer Hospital and 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Michal HrnciarikPulmonary Department, University Hospital Hradec Kralove and Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Jana KrejciDepartment of Pneumology, Bulovka University Hospital and 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Petr DomeckyOAKS Consulting Praha, Prague, Czech Republic.
Martin SvatonDepartment of Pneumology and Phthiseology, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) have a poor prognosis. The standard palliative treatment for four decades has been chemotherapy as a combination of etoposide with carboplatin or cisplatin, and in recent years, immunotherapy in addition.

aimsTo determine whether there is a difference in the efficacy of palliative chemotherapy as cisplatin or carboplatin in combination with etoposide in patients with ES-SCLC in real-world practice in the Czech Republic.

methodsThis was a retrospective analysis of a cohort of 348 patients from the LUCAS project with ES-SCLC. 79 were treated with etoposide plus cisplatin and 265 were treated with etoposide plus carboplatin. Kaplan-Meier curves and the Cox regression model were used for analysis.

resultsNo statistically significant difference in median overall survival (mOS) or median progression free survival (mPFS) was found between groups or between patients grouped according to age and performance status (PS) in mOS. The Cox regression result was similar.

conclusionThis study shows that cisplatin and carboplatin do not differ in efficacy in a given indication, thus when choosing a treatment, the physician should consider the expected toxicity in a particular patient, assessing the patient's general condition and comorbidities.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarboplatinCisplatinEtoposideLung NeoplasmsSmall Cell Lung CarcinomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCzech RepublicFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeCarboplatinCisplatinEtoposidecarboplatincisplatinextensive-stagesmall cell lung cancer

Identifiers

PMID38949235

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.