A randomized trial of two etoposide schedules in small-cell lung cancer: the influence of pharmacokinetics on efficacy and toxicity.

PURPOSE Etoposide is a schedule-dependent drug, as demonstrated by the superiority of 5 consecutive daily infusions over a continuous 24-hour infusion in patients with small-cell lung cancer. A randomized trial has therefore been conducted to compare an extended 8-day regimen with the 5-day schedule. PATIENTS AND METHODS Ninety-four patients with small-cell lung cancer (35 limited disease, 59 extensive disease) were randomized to receive single-agent etoposide 500 mg/m2, either as 5 daily 2-hour infusions of 100 mg/m2 or as 8 daily 75-minute infusions of 62.5 mg/m2, both repeated every 3 weeks for six cycles. Single-agent carboplatin was administered at relapse in both arms of the study. Patients were stratified at randomization according to extent of disease and Karnofsky performance status (KPS). RESULTS The overall response rate was 81% in the 5-day arm and 87% in the 8-day arm, with median survival durations of 7.1 and 9.4 months, respectively (no significant differences). The time over which plasma etoposide exceeded low plasma concentrations was significantly longer in patients who responded compared with patients who did not respond. This was most significant for time at concentrations greater than 1, 1.5, and 2 micrograms/mL. Hematologic toxicity was significantly worse in the 5-day arm of the study (cycle no. 1 nadir neutrophil count, 0.8 x 10(9)/L v 1.7 x 10(9)/L). Stepwise regression analysis found duration of exposure to plasma etoposide greater than 3 micrograms/mL to be predictive of nadir neutrophil count and duration of exposure to plasma etoposide greater than 2 micrograms/mL to be predictive of nadir WBC count. CONCLUSION The 5-day and 8-day regimens had equivalent activity in small-cell lung cancer. A pharmacokinetic association between concentrations of etoposide and response and toxicity was found. Antitumor activity was associated with the maintenance of lower levels of etoposide than found to be associated with hematologic toxicity. This supports the hypothesis that the schedule of etoposide administration may affect efficacy and toxicity, and that prolonged exposure to low concentrations of etoposide may improve the therapeutic ratio for this drug.

[1]  W. Evans,et al.  Altered protein binding of etoposide in patients with cancer , 1989, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[2]  W. Evans,et al.  Relation of systemic exposure to unbound etoposide and hematologic toxicity , 1991, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[3]  M. Slevin,et al.  High-performance liquid chromatography of etoposide in plasma and urine. , 1985, Journal of chromatography.

[4]  M. Pike,et al.  Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. II. analysis and examples. , 1977, British Journal of Cancer.

[5]  A. Miller,et al.  Reporting results of cancer treatment , 1981, Cancer.

[6]  M. D’Incalci,et al.  In vitro cytotoxicity of VP 16 on primary tumor and metastasis of Lewis lung carcinoma. , 1982, European journal of cancer & clinical oncology.

[7]  D G Lowe,et al.  A randomized trial to evaluate the effect of schedule on the activity of etoposide in small-cell lung cancer. , 1989, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  Partial Cross-Resistance of Cultured Murine Leukemia Vincristine-Resistant P388 Cells to 4′-Demethylepipodophyllotoxin Ethylidene-β-D-Glucoside 1 , 1980, Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine. Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine.

[9]  L. Freedman Tables of the number of patients required in clinical trials using the logrank test. , 1982, Statistics in medicine.

[10]  J. Ducore,et al.  Effects of the epipodophyllotoxin VP-16-213 on cell cycle traverse, DNA synthesis, and DNA strand size in cultures of human leukemic lymphoblasts. , 1983, Cancer research.

[11]  M. Slevin,et al.  Variable bioavailability following repeated oral doses of etoposide. , 1985, European journal of cancer & clinical oncology.

[12]  P. Willcox,et al.  Prospective study of etoposide scheduling in combination chemotherapy for limited disease small cell lung carcinoma. , 1991, European journal of cancer.

[13]  A. Krishan,et al.  Cytofluorometric studies on the action of podophyllotoxin and epipodophyllotoxins (VM-26, VP-16-213) on the cell cycle traverse of human lymphoblasts , 1975, The Journal of cell biology.

[14]  J. Haybittle The reporting of non-significant results in clinical trials , 1979 .

[15]  D. Cox Regression Models and Life-Tables , 1972 .

[16]  E. Kaplan,et al.  Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations , 1958 .

[17]  B. Barlogie,et al.  Survival and cycle-progression delay of human lymphoma cells in vitro exposed to VP-16-213. , 1976, Cancer treatment reports.