Etoposide is one of the most active agents for the therapy of lymphomas. Oral etoposide has proven to be active in and clearly beneficial for patients with previously treated lymphomas. The optimal dose and schedule of oral etoposide for use in combination chemotherapy are still uncertain, but low daily doses (50 to 100mg) for 10 to 14 days may be near optimal. Studies in previously untreated patients using combination chemotherapy that includes oral etoposide are needed, since preliminary data suggest that this agent has excellent activity and tolerability when combined or alternated with methotrexate, calcium folinate (calcium leucovorin), cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone in the elderly and medically unfit patient. Combination therapy approaches may also be helpful in HIV-related lymphomas. Additional studies are warranted.
Lymphoma Adis International Limited Etoposide Oral Etoposide Calcium Folinate
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Young RC. Etoposide in the treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Semin Oncol 1992; 19 Suppl. 13: 19–25PubMedGoogle Scholar
Hainsworth JD, Johnson DH, Frazier SR, et al. Chronic daily administration of oral etoposide in refractory lymphoma. Eur J Cancer 1990; 26: 818–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hainsworth JD, Johnson DH, Greco FA. Chronic etoposide schedules in the treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Semin Oncol 1992; 19 Suppl. 14: 13–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
Young WA, Greco FA, Greer JP, et al. Aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in the elderly: an effective, well-tolerated treatment regimen containing extended-schedule etoposide. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994; 86: 1346–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hainsworth JD, Johnson DH, Frazier SR, et al. Chronic daily administration of oral etoposide —a phase I trial. J Clin Oncol 1989; 7: 396–401PubMedGoogle Scholar
Johnson DH, Greco FA, Strupp J, et al. Prolonged administration of oral etoposide in patients with relapsed or refractory small-cell lung cancer: a phase II trial. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 1613–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
Bender RA, Anderson T, Fisher RI, et al. Activity of the epipodophyllotoxin VP-16 in the treatment of combination chemotherapy-resistant non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Am J Hematol 1978; 5: 203–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niitsu N, Umeda M. Evaluation of long-term daily administration of oral low-dose etoposide in elderly patients with relapsing or refractory non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Am J Clin Oncol 1997; 20: 311–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuga T, Kohda K, Matsumoto S, et al. Utility of daily oral administration of etoposide in 25 cases of refractory hematological malignancies. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 1997; 24: 315–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
Shaklia S, Bairey O, Blickstein D, et al. Severe myelotoxicity of oral etoposide in heavily pretreated patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Cancer 1996; 77: 2313–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tirelli U, Errante D, Van Glabbeke MV, et al. CHOP is the standard regimen in patients ≥70 years of age with intermediate-grade and high-grade non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: results of a randomized study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Lymphoma Cooperative Study Group. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 27–34PubMedGoogle Scholar
Begg CB, Carbone PP. Clinical trials and drug toxicity in the elderly. The experience of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Cancer 1983; 52: 1986–92Google Scholar
Remick SC, Sedransk N, Haase R, et al. Oral combination chemotherapy in the management of AIDS-related lymphoproliferative malignancies. Drugs 1999; 58 Suppl. 3: 99–107PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hande KR, Krozely MG, Greco FA, et al. Bioavailability of low-dose oral etoposide. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 374–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
Thompson DS, Hainsworth JD, Hande KR, et al. Prolonged administration of low-dose, infusional etoposide in patients with etoposide-sensitive neoplasms: a phase I/II study. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 1322–8PubMedGoogle Scholar