Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3)

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Intravenous versus oral etoposide : efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3). / Ali, Abir Salwa; Grönberg, Malin; Langer, Seppo W; Ladekarl, Morten; Hjortland, Geir Olav; Vestermark, Lene Weber; Österlund, Pia; Welin, Staffan; Grønbæk, Henning; Knigge, Ulrich; Sorbye, Halfdan; Janson, Eva Tiensuu.

In: Medical Oncology, Vol. 35, No. 4, 47, 2018, p. 1-7.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Ali, AS, Grönberg, M, Langer, SW, Ladekarl, M, Hjortland, GO, Vestermark, LW, Österlund, P, Welin, S, Grønbæk, H, Knigge, U, Sorbye, H & Janson, ET 2018, 'Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3)', Medical Oncology, vol. 35, no. 4, 47, pp. 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x

APA

Ali, A. S., Grönberg, M., Langer, S. W., Ladekarl, M., Hjortland, G. O., Vestermark, L. W., Österlund, P., Welin, S., Grønbæk, H., Knigge, U., Sorbye, H., & Janson, E. T. (2018). Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3). Medical Oncology, 35(4), 1-7. [47]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x

Vancouver

Ali AS, Grönberg M, Langer SW, Ladekarl M, Hjortland GO, Vestermark LW et al. Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3). Medical Oncology. 2018;35(4):1-7. 47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x

Author

Ali, Abir Salwa ; Grönberg, Malin ; Langer, Seppo W ; Ladekarl, Morten ; Hjortland, Geir Olav ; Vestermark, Lene Weber ; Österlund, Pia ; Welin, Staffan ; Grønbæk, Henning ; Knigge, Ulrich ; Sorbye, Halfdan ; Janson, Eva Tiensuu. / Intravenous versus oral etoposide : efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3). In: Medical Oncology. 2018 ; Vol. 35, No. 4. pp. 1-7.

Bibtex

@article{e47e775adf654e1e8caaeba62bd23014,
title = "Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3)",
abstract = "High-grade gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs, G3) are aggressive cancers of the digestive system with poor prognosis and survival. Platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide) is considered the first-line palliative treatment. Etoposide is frequently administered intravenously; however, oral etoposide may be used as an alternative. Concerns for oral etoposide include decreased bioavailability, inter- and intra-patient variability and patient compliance. We aimed to evaluate possible differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with oral etoposide compared to etoposide given as infusion. Patients (n = 236) from the Nordic NEC study were divided into three groups receiving etoposide as a long infusion (24 h, n = 170), short infusion (≤ 5 h, n = 33) or oral etoposide (n = 33) according to hospital tradition. PFS and OS were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier (log-rank), cox proportional hazard ratios and confidence intervals. No statistical differences were observed in PFS or OS when comparing patients receiving long infusion (median PFS 3.8 months, median OS 14.5 months), short infusion (PFS 5.6 months, OS 11.0 months) or oral etoposide (PFS 5.4 months, OS 11.3 months). We observed equal efficacy for the three administration routes suggesting oral etoposide may be safe and efficient in treating high-grade GEP-NEN, G3 patients scheduled for cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide therapy.",
keywords = "Administration, Oral, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic/administration & dosage, Disease-Free Survival, Etoposide/administration & dosage, Female, Humans, Infusions, Intravenous, Intestinal Neoplasms/drug therapy, Kaplan-Meier Estimate, Male, Middle Aged, Neuroendocrine Tumors/drug therapy, Pancreatic Neoplasms/drug therapy, Proportional Hazards Models, Retrospective Studies, Stomach Neoplasms/drug therapy, Treatment Outcome",
author = "Ali, {Abir Salwa} and Malin Gr{\"o}nberg and Langer, {Seppo W} and Morten Ladekarl and Hjortland, {Geir Olav} and Vestermark, {Lene Weber} and Pia {\"O}sterlund and Staffan Welin and Henning Gr{\o}nb{\ae}k and Ulrich Knigge and Halfdan Sorbye and Janson, {Eva Tiensuu}",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "1--7",
journal = "Medical Oncology",
issn = "1357-0560",
publisher = "Humana Press",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Intravenous versus oral etoposide

T2 - efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3)

AU - Ali, Abir Salwa

AU - Grönberg, Malin

AU - Langer, Seppo W

AU - Ladekarl, Morten

AU - Hjortland, Geir Olav

AU - Vestermark, Lene Weber

AU - Österlund, Pia

AU - Welin, Staffan

AU - Grønbæk, Henning

AU - Knigge, Ulrich

AU - Sorbye, Halfdan

AU - Janson, Eva Tiensuu

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - High-grade gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs, G3) are aggressive cancers of the digestive system with poor prognosis and survival. Platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide) is considered the first-line palliative treatment. Etoposide is frequently administered intravenously; however, oral etoposide may be used as an alternative. Concerns for oral etoposide include decreased bioavailability, inter- and intra-patient variability and patient compliance. We aimed to evaluate possible differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with oral etoposide compared to etoposide given as infusion. Patients (n = 236) from the Nordic NEC study were divided into three groups receiving etoposide as a long infusion (24 h, n = 170), short infusion (≤ 5 h, n = 33) or oral etoposide (n = 33) according to hospital tradition. PFS and OS were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier (log-rank), cox proportional hazard ratios and confidence intervals. No statistical differences were observed in PFS or OS when comparing patients receiving long infusion (median PFS 3.8 months, median OS 14.5 months), short infusion (PFS 5.6 months, OS 11.0 months) or oral etoposide (PFS 5.4 months, OS 11.3 months). We observed equal efficacy for the three administration routes suggesting oral etoposide may be safe and efficient in treating high-grade GEP-NEN, G3 patients scheduled for cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide therapy.

AB - High-grade gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs, G3) are aggressive cancers of the digestive system with poor prognosis and survival. Platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide) is considered the first-line palliative treatment. Etoposide is frequently administered intravenously; however, oral etoposide may be used as an alternative. Concerns for oral etoposide include decreased bioavailability, inter- and intra-patient variability and patient compliance. We aimed to evaluate possible differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with oral etoposide compared to etoposide given as infusion. Patients (n = 236) from the Nordic NEC study were divided into three groups receiving etoposide as a long infusion (24 h, n = 170), short infusion (≤ 5 h, n = 33) or oral etoposide (n = 33) according to hospital tradition. PFS and OS were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier (log-rank), cox proportional hazard ratios and confidence intervals. No statistical differences were observed in PFS or OS when comparing patients receiving long infusion (median PFS 3.8 months, median OS 14.5 months), short infusion (PFS 5.6 months, OS 11.0 months) or oral etoposide (PFS 5.4 months, OS 11.3 months). We observed equal efficacy for the three administration routes suggesting oral etoposide may be safe and efficient in treating high-grade GEP-NEN, G3 patients scheduled for cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide therapy.

KW - Administration, Oral

KW - Adult

KW - Aged

KW - Aged, 80 and over

KW - Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic/administration & dosage

KW - Disease-Free Survival

KW - Etoposide/administration & dosage

KW - Female

KW - Humans

KW - Infusions, Intravenous

KW - Intestinal Neoplasms/drug therapy

KW - Kaplan-Meier Estimate

KW - Male

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Neuroendocrine Tumors/drug therapy

KW - Pancreatic Neoplasms/drug therapy

KW - Proportional Hazards Models

KW - Retrospective Studies

KW - Stomach Neoplasms/drug therapy

KW - Treatment Outcome

U2 - 10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x

DO - 10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 29511910

VL - 35

SP - 1

EP - 7

JO - Medical Oncology

JF - Medical Oncology

SN - 1357-0560

IS - 4

M1 - 47

ER -

ID: 218723292