Carboplatin Versus Cisplatin in the Chemotherapy of Solid Tumors — Pro Carboplatin
The fact that we are still debating, in 1995, the merits of carboplatin versus cisplatin in the chemotherapy of solid tumors, exemplifies the extreme slowness of planning, implementing and completing important clinical trials in oncology. Cisplatin was approved for use in the treatment of ovarian cancer in the late 1970s, and carboplatin was approved for salvage therapy of ovarian cancer, in the late 1980s. Six years later, we continue to struggle with decisions concerning the appropriate role for these two platinum analogs in the management of ovarian, cervix, endometrial, head and neck, lung, and testicular cancers. Although there have been abundant phase III clinical trials comparing these agents in a number of target disease sites, the sample size and trial designs in most cases have proven inadequate to allow final conclusions to be drawn. Nevertheless, I have had no difficulty composing a “Pro Carboplatin” position paper. I even can say that this was a pleasurable experience!
KeywordsOvarian Cancer Endometrial Cancer Small Cell Lung Cancer Objective Response Rate Testicular Cancer
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.U.S.A. FDA approved package insert for Paraplatin (carboplatin for injection).Google Scholar
- 2.U.S.A. FDA approved package insert for Platinol (cisplatin for injection USP).Google Scholar
- 8.D.S. Alberts, S. Green and E.V. Hannigan, et al. Improved therapeutic index of carboplatin plus cyclophosphamide versus cisplatin plus cyclophosphamide: Final report by the Southwest Oncology Group of a phase in randomized trial in stages III and IV ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 10: 706–17 (1992).PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.D. Belpomme, R. Bugat and M. Rives, et al. Carboplatin versus cisplatin in association with cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin as first line therapy in stage III–IV ovarian carcinoma: Results of an ARTAC phase III trial. Proc ASCO, 11:227(1992).Google Scholar
- 13.T. Kato, H. Nishimura and T. Yamabe, et al. Phase III study of carboplatin for ovarian cancer. Japanese J of Cancer Chemother, 15: 2297–304 (1988).Google Scholar
- 17.P.D. Bonomi, D.M. Finkelstein, J.C. Ruckdeschel, et al. Combination Chemotherapy versus Single Agents Followed by Combination Chemotherapy in Stage IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Study of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Onc, 7:1602–1613, (1989).Google Scholar
- 18.J. Klastersky, J.P. Sculier, H. Lacroix, et al., Randomized Study Comparing Cisplatin or Carboplatin with Etoposide in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Protocol 07861. J Clin Onc, 8:1556–1562, (1990).Google Scholar
- 21.D.S. Bajorin, M.F. Sarosty, D.G. Pfeister, et al., Randomized of Etoposide and Cisplatin versus Etoposide and Carboplatin in Patients with Good-Risk Germ Cell Tumors: A Multi-institutional Study, J Clin One, 11:598–606, (1993).Google Scholar
- 22.Al-arafam, Semin Oncol, 21(5):28–34, (1994).Google Scholar
- 24.J.B. Green, S. Green, D.S. Alberts, et al. Carboplatin in Advanced Endometrial Cancer: A Southwest Oncology Group Phase II Study. In: Carboplatin JM-8: Current Prospective and Future Directions, P.A. Bunn, R. Canetta, R.F. Ozols, and M. Rozencweig (Eds). W.B. Saunders Company, pp. 113-121, (1990).Google Scholar
- 25.D. Alberts, E. Hannigan, R. Canetta, et al. Cisplatin versus carboplatin in advanced ovarian cancer? An economic analysis. Pharmacy & Therapeutics, 19: 692–706, (1994).Google Scholar