A randomized trial to evaluate the effect of schedule on the activity of etoposide in small-cell lung cancer.

Etoposide is an increasingly used and well-tolerated drug in cancer medicine. Its cytotoxic action is phase-specific and it has demonstrated schedule dependency in both in vitro and animal studies, but clinical evidence of the importance of drug scheduling is uncertain. The two administration schedules of etoposide that have been compared in this randomized study of 39 patients with previously untreated extensive small-cell lung cancer treated with single-agent etoposide were 500 mg/m2 as a continuous intravenous (IV) infusion over 24 hours or five consecutive daily 2-hour infusions each of 100 mg/m2. Both regimens were repeated every 3 weeks, for a maximum of six cycles. Patients received combination chemotherapy with vincristine, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (VAC) or radiotherapy on failure to respond or at relapse, depending on their Karnofsky performance status. The same therapy was used in both arms of the study. All patients are evaluable for response to etoposide. In the 24-hour arm, two patients achieved a partial remission, resulting in an overall response rate of 10%. In the 5-day schedule, 16 patients had a partial response and one had a complete remission, producing an overall response rate of 89%, which was significantly superior to that in the 24-hour arm (P less than .001). The median duration of remission to etoposide in the 5-day arm was 4.5 months. Bone marrow toxicity was similar in both schedules. Etoposide pharmacokinetics were measured in all patients, and total areas under the concentration versus time curves (AUCs) were equivalent in both regimens. This study has clearly demonstrated the importance of etoposide scheduling in humans, and the superiority of five daily infusions over a 24-hour continuous infusion. The response rate to single-agent etoposide using an efficacious schedule in extensive small-cell lung cancer has been determined to be in excess of 80%.

[1]  P. Bunn,et al.  Therapeutic trials with VP-16-213 and VM-26: active agents in small cell lung cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphomas, and other malignancies. , 1979, Cancer treatment reports.

[2]  D. V. Von Hoff,et al.  VM 26 and VP 16–213: A comparative analysis , 1977, Cancer.

[3]  Etoposide infusions for treatment of metastatic lung cancer. , 1984, Cancer treatment reports.

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

[5]  N. Vogelzang,et al.  VP-16-213 (etoposide): the mandrake root from Issyk-Kul. , 1982, The American journal of medicine.

[6]  R. Wittes,et al.  Etoposide (VP-16-213). Current status of an active anticancer drug. , 1985, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  H. Hansen,et al.  The epipodophyllotoxin derivatives VM-26 and VP-16-213, 1976-1979, a review. , 1980, Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer.

[8]  Newlands Es VP-16 in combinations for first-line treatment of malignant germ-cell tumors and gestational choriocarcinoma. , 1985 .

[9]  J. Hainsworth,et al.  High-dose induction chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer. , 1987, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[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]  N. Nissen,et al.  Schedule dependency of the antileukemic activity of the podophyllotoxin-derivative VP 16-213 (NSC-141540) in L1210 leukemia. , 2009, Acta pathologica et microbiologica Scandinavica. Section A, Pathology.

[12]  M. Slevin,et al.  International Groups Consult on Prioritizing Chemicals , 1995, Environmental Health Perspectives.

[13]  H. Hansen,et al.  Teniposide (VM-26), an overlooked highly active agent in small-cell lung cancer. Results of a phase II trial in untreated patients. , 1986, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  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.

[15]  J. Hainsworth,et al.  High-dose etoposide (VP-16) in small-cell lung cancer. , 1985, Seminars in oncology.

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