Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 6;20:278. doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-06780-x

Table 3.

Toxicity according to performance status and treatment

Toxicity ECOG 2 group ECOG 0–1 group pb
EP arm
(n = 31)
PC arm
(n = 40)
pa EP arm
(n = 64)
PC arm
(n = 56)
pa
Hematological 0.663 0.725 0.854
 Grade 3/4 10 (32.3%) 11 (27.5%) 19 (29.7%) 15 (26.8%)
 Grade 1/2 21 (67.7%) 29 (72.5%) 45 (70.3%) 41 (73.2%)
Esophagitis 0.078 0.017 0.230
 Grade 3 8 (25.8%) 4 (10.0%) 11 (17.2%) 2 (3.6%)
  < Grade 3 23 (74.2%) 36 (90.0%) 53 (82.8%) 54 (96.4%)
Radiation pneumonitis 0.014 0.066 0.428
  ≥ Grade 3 0 (0.0%) 7 (17.5%) 7 (10.9%) 1 (1.8%)
  < Grade 3 31 (100.0%) 33 (82.5%) 57 (89.1%) 55 (98.2%)
Gastrointestinal toxicity 0.327 0.285 0.950
  ≥ Grade 3 3 (9.7%) 8 (20.0%) 8 (12.5%) 11 (19.6%)
  < Grade 3 28 (90.3%) 32 (80.0%) 56 (87.5%) 45 (80.4%)
Dermatological toxicity 0.598 0.296
  ≥ Grade 3 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (1.6%) 2 (3.6%)
  < Grade 3 31 (100.0%) 40 (100.0%) 63 (98.4%) 54 (96.4%)

Abbreviations: EP etoposide/cisplatin, PC paclitaxel/carboplatin, ECOG Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

ap value for testing the null hypothesis of no difference between patients receiving EP and PC chemotherapy

bp value for testing the null hypothesis of no difference between ECOG 2 group and ECOG 0–1 group