A Retrospective Analysis of Cervical Cancer Patients Treated with Carboplatin and Paclitaxel in First Palliative Line at Brazilian National Cancer Institute (INCA)

Cervical cancer represents a public health problem. Currently, it is the second most common neoplasia worldwide, with approximately 85% of the cases in developing countries. Most of the patients presents with advanced disease. The treatment based on cisplatin and radiotherapy is considered standard to patients with locally advanced cervical cancer, stages IIB to IVA. However, the results are not good enough, especially in stages III e IVA, which shows five-year survival rates of 40 and 15%, respectively. The combination of cisplatin and paclitaxel (CDDP + P) is the standard treatment in first palliative line in several oncology institutions. The replacement of CDDP by carboplatin (C) is regularly done and probably presents less non-hematologic toxicity; however, there is no data in the literature related to the specific efficacy and toxicity to the combination of C + P in this context. At INCA, the combination of C + P has been the standard treatment in first palliative line since August 2008. Objectives To evaluate response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity of patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer treated with C + P. Material and methods A retrospective analysis of cervical cancer patients treated with C + P in first palliative line at INCA, between August 2008 and January 2010. Results A total of 154 patients were enrolled in the study. The most frequent histology was squamous carcinoma and 51.3 % of the patients were diagnosed as stages III and IV. 50% of the patients received 6 or more cycles of C + P as first palliative line. Objective responses were documented in 35.1% (5.2% complete responses plus 29.9 % partial responses). The median PFS and OS was 4.07 (IC95% 2.8 – 5.3) and 8.4 (IC95% 6.2 – 10.7) months respectively. Hematologic toxicity was the most common: Grade 3 and 4 anemia, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were 42.2%, 18.1% and - 9.1%, respectively. Conclusion Indirect comparison with published data of the prospective trial using CDDP + P our results were only slightly different, probably related to differences in patients clinical and demographics data. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.