↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Platinum versus non-platinum chemotherapy regimens for small cell lung cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

6 tweeters
2 Facebook pages
1 Wikipedia page


34 Dimensions

Readers on

185 Mendeley
Platinum versus non-platinum chemotherapy regimens for small cell lung cancer
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006849.pub3
Pubmed ID

Isuru U Amarasena, Saion Chatterjee, Julia AE Walters, Richard Wood-Baker, Kwun M Fong


Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a very fast growing form of cancer and is characterised by early metastasis. As a result, chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment. A number of different platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and non-platinum-based chemotherapy regimens have been used for the treatment of SCLC, with varying results. This review was conducted to analyse the data from these studies in order to compare their effectiveness. To determine the effectiveness of platinum chemotherapy regimens compared with non-platinum chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of SCLC with respect to survival, tumour response, toxicity and quality of life. We searched the biomedical literature databases CENTRAL (TheCochrane Library 2014, Issue 7), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL from 1966 to August 2014. In addition, we handsearched reference lists from relevant resources. All randomised controlled trials involving patients with pathologically confirmed SCLC (including both limited-stage disease and extensive-stage disease) and the use of a platinum-based chemotherapy regimen in at least one treatment arm and a non-platinum-based chemotherapy regimen in a separate arm. We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. Two authors independently assessed search results. We assessed included studies for methodological quality and recorded the following outcome data: survival, tumour response, toxicity and quality of life. We combined the results of the survival, tumour response and toxicity data in a meta-analysis. Quality-of-life data were analysed individually. A total of 32 studies involving 6075 patients with SCLC were included in this systematic review. The majority of studies were multi-centre randomised controlled trials conducted throughout Europe, North America and Asia with the earliest study publishing data in 1981 and the latest in 2014. The duration of studies ranged from 12 to 72 months with a median of 32 months. The median age of patients in the vast majority of studies was between 60 and 65 years of age. Eighteen studies presented data on extensive-stage disease. Nine studies presented data on limited-stage disease. Eleven studies did not present data based on the disease stage. These data were analysed separately in subgroup analyses. Sixteen (50%) studies were of good quality with a low risk of bias and the data from these studies were analysed separately in a heterogeneity analysis.There was no statistically significant difference between treatment groups in terms of survival at 6 months, 12 months and 24 months. There was also no statistically significant difference in terms of overall tumour response. However, platinum-based treatment regimens did have a significantly higher rate of complete response. Platinum-based chemotherapy regimens had significantly higher rates of nausea and vomiting and thrombocytopenia toxicity. Four trials presented quality-of-life data, but, due to the different systems used to measure quality of life this data could not be combined in a meta-analysis. Platinum-based chemotherapy regimens did not offer a statistically significant benefit in survival or overall tumour response compared with non-platinum-based regimens. However, platinum-based chemotherapy regimens did increase complete response rates, at the cost of higher adverse events including nausea and vomiting, anaemia and thrombocytopenia toxicity. These data suggest non-platinum chemotherapy regimens have a more advantageous risk-benefit profile. This systematic review highlights the lack of quality-of-life data in trials involving chemotherapy treatment for SCLC. With poor long-term survival associated with both treatment groups, the issue of the quality of the survival period takes on even more significance. It would be beneficial for future trials in this area to include a quality-of-life assessment.

Twitter Demographics

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Unknown 184 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 16%
Student > Bachelor 26 14%
Researcher 20 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 8%
Other 25 14%
Unknown 51 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 5%
Psychology 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 57 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 October 2019.
All research outputs
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 12,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 264,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 277 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,317 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.4. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,410 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 277 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.