These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [A phase II study of etoposide (NK 171) in small cell lung cancer--comparison of results between intravenous administration and oral administration].
    Author: Furuse K.
    Journal: Gan To Kagaku Ryoho; 1985 Dec; 12(12):2352-7. PubMed ID: 3000299.
    Abstract:
    A phase II study of Etoposide (NK 171) was carried out in 13 institutions of the National Chest Hospital Lung Cancer Cooperative Study Group. Twenty-two patients (pts.) were treated by intravenous (i.v.) administration of etoposide, 80 mg/m2/day, for 5 consecutive days, and 25 pts. by oral administration of the same drug, 130 mg/m2/day, for 5 consecutive days. Eight (36.4%) out of 22 evaluable pts. given i.v. etoposide showed partial response (PR) while 7 (28%) out of 25 evaluable pts. given oral etoposide showed PR. Thirteen (41%) out of 32 previously untreated pts. were responders, but only 2 (13%) out of 15 previously treated pts. responded. The average total dose of i.v. etoposide was 664 (368-1552) mg/m2 while that of oral etoposide was 1320 mg/m2, or about double the dose of i.v. etoposide. The major dose-limiting factor was leukopenia (less than 3000/mm3). being observed in 63.6% of the i.v. treated pts. and 31.8% of the orally-treated pts. The oral and i.v. etoposide provided equivalent results. Despite the advantage of the reduced myelotoxicity of oral etoposide, we may recommend that all pts. are treated parenterally at present until the problem of erratic absorption of the oral drug is resolved.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]