This study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of ifosfamide plus etoposide plus platinum (IEP) to that of etoposide plus platinum (EP) in patients with previously untreated small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). The Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE and Chinese Biomedical Literature databases were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials comparing IEP to EP in patients with histologically proven SCLC. Two investigators independently assessed the quality of the relevant trials and extracted data. We analyzed the data using Review Manager software, version 4.2.8. A total of 4 trials with 447 previously untreated SCLC patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that there were no significant differences in the overall response [relative risk (RR) = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.97-1.19], 1-year survival rate (RR=1.22, 95% CI: 0.96-1.55) and 2-year survival rate (RR=1.52, 95% CI: 0.75-3.07) between the IEP and EP regimens. However, there were significant differences between the IEP and EP regimens regarding the incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia (RR=1.52, 95% CI: 1.07-2.17) and grade 3/4 vomiting (RR=1.78, 95% CI: 1.02-3.11). In conclusion, our results suggested that IEP is not superior to EP regimen for the treatment of previously untreated SCLC, whereas the IEP regimen is associated with more severe hematological and gastrointestinal toxicities compared to EP. Therefore, the use of ifosfamide in multimodality treatment regimens requires further investigation.
Keywords: etoposide; ifosfamide; platinum; small-cell lung cancer.