Virtual Library

 x 
My Library Virtual Library FAQ

Start Your Search

R. Marsé



Author of

  • +

    MA06 - Locally Advanced NSCLC: Risk Groups, Biological Factors and Treatment Choices (ID 379)

    • Event: WCLC 2016
    • Type: Mini Oral Session
    • Track: Locally Advanced NSCLC
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      MA06.09 - Efficacy RENO Study Results of Oral Vinorelbine or Etoposide with Cisplatin & Chemo-Radiation in Stage III NSCLC. SLCG 10/02 (ID 4238)

      17:00 - 17:06  |  Author(s): R. Marsé

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background:
      This study aims to compare efficacy and safety of two widely used combinations of cisplatin (P) in this setting: as etoposide (E) and vinorelbine. This last, in its oral formulation (oV) which has achieved comparable results as the IV formulation and patients (pts) prefer it.

      Methods:
      Pts between 18-75years, with histologically proven untreated and unresectable locally-advanced NSCLC (LA-NSCLC), adequate respiratory function, V20≤35% and ECOG-PS 0-1, were randomized 1:1 to oV-P arm: 2 induction cycles (cy) of oV-P followed by 2 cy more with RT; or to E-P arm: 2 cy of E-P concomitants to RT. Both arms with a total radiation dose of 66Gy administered 2 Gys daily. Primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) by RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints: overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and safety. With α-error of 0.05 (one-tailed test) and 0.1 β-error, median PFS unacceptable for the oV-P arm of 10 months (m) (p0) and a very acceptable of 15 m (p1), 122 eligible pts were required.

      Results:
      140 pts from 23 institutions of SLCG were randomized between 08/2011-12/2014. 134 pts were treated (66 in oV-P and 68 in E-P arms). Results based on this 134 pts are presented. Median age 62 years [39-76]; PS 0/1, 45%/55%; current smoker 51%; squamous cell 51%; stage IIIB 54%. 244 and 131 cy were given in the oV-P and E-P arms, respectively. All irradiated pts in oV-P arm received at least 60Gy, 7 pts in the E-P arm received less than 60Gy (4 due to toxicity). 1 pt (1.5%) in oV-P arm and 12 pts (17.6%) in E-P arm presented esophagitis G3/4 (p=0.002). 121 confirmed eligibility for efficacy analysis. ORR were 39 (64%) and 40 pts (67%) in the oV-P and E-P arms, respectively (p=0.889). After 16 m [1-43] of follow-up, 66% pts progressed and 43% pts died. Median PFS is 11.4 m (IC95%; 6-17) in oV-P arm and 11.8 m (IC95%; 7-16) in E-P arm (p=0.374).

      Conclusion:
      Both regimens achieve similar efficacy however oV-P has less toxicity, especially esophagitis G3/4. Further follow-up is needed for the survival analysis.

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.