A randomized comparative trial of sequential versus alternating cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin and mitomycin, lomustine, and methotrexate in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

R. T. Eagan, S. Frytak, R. L. Richardson, E. T. Creagan, Terry M Therneau, D. T. Coles, J. R. Jett

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

One hundred eight eligible patients with advanced, metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomized to treatment with either cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (CAP) followed by mitomycin, lomustine, and methotrexate (MCM) on progression (sequential, 54 patients) or to CAP alternating with MCM (alternating, 54 patients). The regression rate (30%) was identical for both treatments. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences noted between treatments for regression duration (6.9 months v 7.6 months), time to progression (2.1 months v 4.4 months), or overall survival (5.5 months v 6.9 months). The lack of advantage for the theoretically superior alternating approach was probably due to a combination of relative ineffectiveness of each treatment and lack of complete non-cross resistance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)5-8
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
Volume6
Issue number1
StatePublished - 1988

Fingerprint

Lomustine
Mitomycin
Methotrexate
Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
Doxorubicin
Cyclophosphamide
Cisplatin
Therapeutics
Survival

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology

Cite this

A randomized comparative trial of sequential versus alternating cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin and mitomycin, lomustine, and methotrexate in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. / Eagan, R. T.; Frytak, S.; Richardson, R. L.; Creagan, E. T.; Therneau, Terry M; Coles, D. T.; Jett, J. R.

In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1988, p. 5-8.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c768d5b6cc374bf49d04fd0cd41ea8a4,
title = "A randomized comparative trial of sequential versus alternating cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin and mitomycin, lomustine, and methotrexate in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer",
abstract = "One hundred eight eligible patients with advanced, metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomized to treatment with either cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (CAP) followed by mitomycin, lomustine, and methotrexate (MCM) on progression (sequential, 54 patients) or to CAP alternating with MCM (alternating, 54 patients). The regression rate (30{\%}) was identical for both treatments. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences noted between treatments for regression duration (6.9 months v 7.6 months), time to progression (2.1 months v 4.4 months), or overall survival (5.5 months v 6.9 months). The lack of advantage for the theoretically superior alternating approach was probably due to a combination of relative ineffectiveness of each treatment and lack of complete non-cross resistance.",
author = "Eagan, {R. T.} and S. Frytak and Richardson, {R. L.} and Creagan, {E. T.} and Therneau, {Terry M} and Coles, {D. T.} and Jett, {J. R.}",
year = "1988",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
pages = "5--8",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Oncology",
issn = "0732-183X",
publisher = "American Society of Clinical Oncology",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A randomized comparative trial of sequential versus alternating cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin and mitomycin, lomustine, and methotrexate in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

AU - Eagan, R. T.

AU - Frytak, S.

AU - Richardson, R. L.

AU - Creagan, E. T.

AU - Therneau, Terry M

AU - Coles, D. T.

AU - Jett, J. R.

PY - 1988

Y1 - 1988

N2 - One hundred eight eligible patients with advanced, metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomized to treatment with either cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (CAP) followed by mitomycin, lomustine, and methotrexate (MCM) on progression (sequential, 54 patients) or to CAP alternating with MCM (alternating, 54 patients). The regression rate (30%) was identical for both treatments. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences noted between treatments for regression duration (6.9 months v 7.6 months), time to progression (2.1 months v 4.4 months), or overall survival (5.5 months v 6.9 months). The lack of advantage for the theoretically superior alternating approach was probably due to a combination of relative ineffectiveness of each treatment and lack of complete non-cross resistance.

AB - One hundred eight eligible patients with advanced, metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were randomized to treatment with either cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (CAP) followed by mitomycin, lomustine, and methotrexate (MCM) on progression (sequential, 54 patients) or to CAP alternating with MCM (alternating, 54 patients). The regression rate (30%) was identical for both treatments. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences noted between treatments for regression duration (6.9 months v 7.6 months), time to progression (2.1 months v 4.4 months), or overall survival (5.5 months v 6.9 months). The lack of advantage for the theoretically superior alternating approach was probably due to a combination of relative ineffectiveness of each treatment and lack of complete non-cross resistance.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0023849681&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0023849681&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 2826714

AN - SCOPUS:0023849681

VL - 6

SP - 5

EP - 8

JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology

JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology

SN - 0732-183X

IS - 1

ER -