White Rose University Consortium logo
University of Leeds logo University of Sheffield logo York University logo

Chemotherapy versus supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: improved survival without detriment to quality of life

Spiro, S.G., Rudd, R.M., Souhami, R.L., Brown, J., Fairlamb, D.J., Gower, N.H., Maslove, L., Milroy, R., Napp, V., Parmar, M.K.B., Peake, M.D., Stephens, R.J., Thorpe, H., Waller, D.A. and West, P. (2004) Chemotherapy versus supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: improved survival without detriment to quality of life. Thorax. pp. 828-836. ISSN 0040-6376

Full text available as:
[img]
Preview
Text (brownj1.pdf)
brownj1.pdf

Download (154Kb)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 1995 a meta-analysis of randomised trials investigating the value of adding chemotherapy to primary treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) suggested a small survival benefit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy in each of the primary treatment settings. However, the metaanalysis included many small trials and trials with differing eligibility criteria and chemotherapy regimens. METHODS: The aim of the Big Lung Trial was to confirm the survival benefits seen in the meta-analysis and to assess quality of life and cost in the supportive care setting. A total of 725 patients were randomised to receive supportive care alone (n = 361) or supportive care plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy (n = 364). RESULTS: 65% of patients allocated chemotherapy (C) received all three cycles of treatment and a further 27% received one or two cycles. 74% of patients allocated no chemotherapy (NoC) received thoracic radiotherapy compared with 47% of the C group. Patients allocated C had a significantly better survival than those allocated NoC: HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.89, p = 0.0006), median survival 8.0 months for the C group v 5.7 months for the NoC group, a difference of 9 weeks. There were 19 (5%) treatment related deaths in the C group. There was no evidence that any subgroup benefited more or less fromchemotherapy. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of the pre-defined primary and secondary quality of life end points, although large negative effects of chemotherapy were ruled out. The regimens used proved to be cost effective, the extra cost of chemotherapy being offset by longer survival. CONCLUSIONS: The survival benefit seen in this trial was entirely consistent with the NSCLC meta-analysis and subsequent similarly designed large trials. The information on quality of life and cost should enablepatients and their clinicians to make more informed treatment choices.

Item Type: Article
Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information: © 2004 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & British Thoracic Society
Keywords: PHASE-III TRIAL, CLINICAL-TRIALS, QUESTIONNAIRE QLQ-C30, COST-EFFECTIVENESS, PLUS CHEMOTHERAPY, CISPLATIN, COMBINATION, ONCOLOGY, REGIMENS, SCORES
Institution: The University of York
Academic Units: The University of York
Depositing User: Sherpa Assistant
Date Deposited: 03 Feb 2005
Last Modified: 14 Oct 2014 11:57
Published Version: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/thx.2003.020164
Status: Published
Refereed: Yes
Related URLs:
URI: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/252

Actions (repository staff only: login required)