Nelie makes a good point (re sample size) and I tred to find the references in the Moffitt article but they were not listed. The general feeling from all the MOs I've spoken to is that there is little difference in outcome -- several told me cis is used because it has the "longest history" -- there have been some studies on ovarian cancer where a platinoid was the *sole* therapy (no radiation) and cis showed a slight advantage over carbo. One has to wonder, however, if the chemo adds only an estmated 10-15% to the radiation how much difference a slight advantage would be (e.g. 5-10% of 10-15%, is 0.5 to 1.5% added control) in light of the much more significant toxicities associated with cisplatin.

In any case, planty of people getting carboplatin are having complete clinical responses to their therapy so it certainly works.

I too would be interested in Moffitt's response in light of their 2002 article. Perhaps that MO is the only one using carboplatin but if so, why was he asked to write an article espousing it's use. Possibly in the intervening years Moffitt has fond out something we should know about the relative efficacy.

Gail