Cisplatin and Etoposide Versus Carboplatin and Paclitaxel With Concurrent Radiotherapy for Stage III Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: An Analysis of Veterans Health Administration Data

Author:

Santana-Davila Rafael1,Devisetty Kiran1,Szabo Aniko1,Sparapani Rodney1,Arce-Lara Carlos1,Gore Elizabeth M.1,Moran Amy1,Williams Christina D.1,Kelley Michael J.1,Whittle Jeffrey1

Affiliation:

1. Rafael Santana-Davila, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Kiran Devisetty, Michigan State University, Flint, MI; Aniko Szabo and Rodney Sparapani, Medical College of Wisconsin; Rafael Santana-Davila, Carlos Arce-Lara, Elizabeth M. Gore, Amy Moran, and Jeffrey Whittle, Clement J. Zablocki Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI; and Christina D. Williams and Michael J. Kelley, Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, NC.

Abstract

Purpose The optimal chemotherapy regimen to use with radiotherapy in stage III non–small-cell lung cancer is unknown. Here, we compare the outcome of patents treated within the Veterans Health Administration with either etoposide-cisplatin (EP) or carboplatin-paclitaxel (CP). Methods We identified patients treated with EP and CP with concurrent radiotherapy from 2001 to 2010. Survival rates were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression models with adjustments for confounding provided by propensity score methods and an instrumental variables analysis. Comorbidities and treatment complications were identified through administrative data. Results A total of 1,842 patients were included; EP was used in 27% (n = 499). Treatment with EP was not associated with a survival advantage in a Cox proportional hazards model (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.10), a propensity score matched cohort (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.24), or a propensity score adjusted model (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.10). In an instrumental variables analysis, there was no survival advantage for patients treated in centers where EP was used more than 50% of the time as compared with centers where EP was used in less than 10% of the patients (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.26). Patients treated with EP, compared with patients treated with CP, had more hospitalizations (2.4 v 1.7 hospitalizations, respectively; P < .001), outpatient visits (17.6 v 12.6 visits, respectively; P < .001), infectious complications (47.3% v 39.4%, respectively; P = .0022), acute kidney disease/dehydration (30.5% v 21.2%, respectively; P < .001), and mucositis/esophagitis (18.6% v 14.4%, respectively; P = .0246). Conclusion After accounting for prognostic variables, patients treated with EP versus CP had similar overall survival, but EP was associated with increased morbidity.

Publisher

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3