Comparison of Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy with Conventional Radiotherapy in Advanced Non-smal Cell Lung Cancer.
10.4046/trd.1997.44.3.493
- Author:
Hui Jung KIM
;
Dong Soo LEE
;
So Hyang SONG
;
Su Mi JUNG
;
Young Kyoon KIM
;
Se Chul YOON
;
Hwa Sik MOON
;
Jeong Sup SONG
;
Sung Hak PARK
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Non-small cell lung cancer;
Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy
- MeSH:
Adenocarcinoma;
Arm;
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung;
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell;
Cause of Death;
Chemoradiotherapy*;
Cisplatin;
Combined Modality Therapy;
Compliance;
Female;
Humans;
Incidence;
Lung Neoplasms*;
Lung*;
Male;
Radiation Pneumonitis;
Radiotherapy*
- From:Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
1997;44(3):493-504
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Non-small cell lung cancer is one of the most frequent cause of death due to cancer in men, and its incidence among women is rapidly increasing. Although there has been a recent surge of interest in combined modality therapy for stage III non-small cell lung cancer(NSCLC), the optimal treatment is still not well established. Thoracic irradiation has long been the gold standard for locally advanced unresectable NSCLC. However, although conventional radiotherapy(XRT) can palliate symptom and improve local control of disease, it huts at most only a modest effect on survival. Recently, cisplatin(cia-diamminedichloroplatinum ) has been reported to enhance the cell-killing effect of radiation For patients with unresectable NSCLC, cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy(CCRT) had the advantage of therapeutic response over XRT alone and therapeutic side effect more commonly occurred in CCRT group in EORTC(European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer) and other trials. Objectives : We compared therapeutic response, compliance, and side effects between CCRT and XRT in patients with advanced NSCLC. Patients and METHOD: Thirty patients with biopsy-proven inoperable NSCLC were randomized to one of two treatment arms. Arm A consisted of XRT, radiotherapy for 4~6 weeks(1.8 Gy given 20~33 times, in five fractions a week), and arm B consisted of CCRT, radiotherapy for 2 weeks(3 Gy given 10 times, in five fractions a week), followed by 3 week rest period and then radiotherapy 2 more weeks(2.5 Gy given 10 timed in five fractions a week), combined with 6mg cisplatin per square meter, given daily before radiotherapy. We evaluate therapeutic response, compliance, change of performance status, side effects, and radiation pneumonitis by using the author's made scoring system. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in therapeutic response and compliance. But there was a significantly lower laboratory complication and radiation pneumonitis in CCRT group (p<0.05). There's significant negative correlation between stage and therapeutic response score in both groups(R=0.353, p<0.05). In both groups, patients with squamous cell carcinoma had a tendency to higher therapeutic response score than those with adenocarcinoma. CONCLUSION: There was. no difference between CCRT and XRT in respect to therapeutic response and compliance. But CCRT had a advantage of decreased side effects.
