Randomized phase III trial comparing cisplatin-etoposide to carboplatin-paclitaxel in advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

Predictive value of circulating endothelial cells for efficacy of chemotherapy with Rh-endostatin in non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

The present study was designed to elucidate the fluctuation of activated CECs (aCECs) during different therapies and to investigate their predictive value for efficacy of anti-angiogenesis and chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Seventy-two patients were randomized into three arms, treated with concomitant NP (vinorelbine and cisplatin) and Rh-endostatin, Rh-endostatin followed by NP, and single NP up to a maximum of six cycles. Response, time to progression (TTP), and aCECs levels were observed. The correlation between aCECs and efficacy was analyzed.

RESULTS

We found that TTP was 8.5 months in concomitant NP and Rh-endostatin versus 5.3 months in NP (p = 0.04) and 6.0 months in Rh-endostatin followed by NP. aCECs fluctuated during the therapeutic period, with a significantly high level from baseline on 8th day of Rh-endostatin followed by NP regimen, that is, when single Rh-endostatin was administered for 1 week, and upon completion of therapy in cases of progressive disease in each group (all p < 0.05). When TTP was longer than 10 months, aCECs count difference (∆aCECs, the difference in the aCECs by post-therapeutic amount minus pre-therapeutic amount) was reversely correlated to TTP (p = 0.003, r = -0.647).

CONCLUSIONS

An improved synergistic effect was achieved from concomitant NP and Rh-endostatin compared with Rh-endostatin followed by NP and single NP. aCECs increased when the disease was aggravated or single Rh-endostatin treatment of Rh-endostatin was administered, while they decreased when a clinical response to the combined therapy was obtained. Our results suggest ∆aCECs as an ideal marker to predict the response to Rh-endostatin combined with chemotherapy.

Maintenance therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: switch versus continuation

INTRODUCTION

The concept of maintenance therapy in lung cancer has stirred a great deal of interest over the last decade. Several randomized studies have been conducted to find out the usefulness of maintenance therapies for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the major benchmark clinical trials and strategies in the field of maintenance chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC. The two strategies used in maintenance therapy are: i) continuation maintenance - continuation of one of the initial treatments; and ii) switch maintenance - switching to a different agent not administered as initial treatment. Both chemotherapeutic and molecular targeted agents have been studied in the maintenance setting. These include docetaxel, gemcitabine, pemetrexed, bevacizumab, erlotinib and gefitinib. This paper discusses the relevant clinical trials using these agents and the two different strategies in the maintenance therapy in advanced NSCLC.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite some controversy regarding the choice or the timing of the maintenance therapy, most of the clinical trials have demonstrated a significant improvement of progression-free survival, translating to a survival benefit with pemetrexed and erlotinib. The approval of pemetrexed and erlotinib by the FDA has certainly shifted the pendulum towards maintenance therapy.

Optimizing the management of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a personal view

The management of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (a-nsclc) is currently undergoing one of its rare paradigm shifts. Just as the nihilism of the 1970s gave way to the empiricism of the 1980s and 1990s, so the current decade has seen the first truly rational therapies based on informed design. In addition, molecular markers and traditional parameters can now be combined to provide a framework of knowledge that will guide the application of not just the new therapies, but also the older ones that remain effective. This framework—as important a component of the rational paradigm as the new drugs themselves are—is necessary to decide who should and, crucially, who should not receive the various components of this rapidly expanding armamentarium. Here, I have provided a historical overview of the drug treatment of a-nsclc, a mini-review of important new data, and an integrative approach that tries to ensure that patients receive the optimal treatment choice at the appropriate time.

The speed at which new knowledge now arrives, coupled with the persistent high level of unmet medical need, suggests that the traditional pace of evidence-based review needs to be accelerated. Indeed, the increased scope for personalized management constitutes something of a challenge to “business as usual” evidence-based medicine. As a result, substantial investment on the part of payers, which may or may not be possible, will be required. In the meantime, some patients may wish and may be financially able to take advantage of modern developments before they have been fully digested by the public-payer system. Responsive clinicians face difficult tradeoffs as they try to balance the pros and cons of early adoption versus excessive conservatism.

The present article is my personal view of how to navigate these waters, and although it is written especially for patients who like to be the captain of their own ship, there is good reason to believe that all patients will eventually be managed by similar, if not identical, means. Nonetheless, the recommendations herein should not be construed as appropriately reviewed provincial or national guidelines. Finally, if appropriate, a clinical trial should always be offered.

Health-related quality of life in non-small-cell lung cancer: an update of a systematic review on methodologic issues in randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

This study is an update of a systematic review of health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) methodology reporting in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The objective was to evaluate HRQOL methodology reporting over the last decade and its benefit for clinical decision making.

METHODS

A MEDLINE systematic literature review was performed. Eligible RCTs implemented patient-reported HRQOL assessments and regular oncology treatments for newly diagnosed adult patients with NSCLC. Included studies were published in English from August 2002 to July 2010. Two independent reviewers evaluated all included RCTs.

RESULTS

Fifty-three RCTs were assessed. Of the 53 RCTs, 81% reported that there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS). However, 50% of RCTs that were unable to find OS differences reported a significant difference in HRQOL scores. The quality of HRQOL reporting has improved; both reporting of clinically significant differences and statistical testing of HRQOL have improved. A European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer HRQOL questionnaire was used in 57% of the studies. However, reporting of HRQOL hypotheses and rationales for choosing HRQOL instruments were significantly less than before 2002 (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

The number of NSCLC RCTs incorporating HRQOL assessments has considerably increased. HRQOL continues to demonstrate its importance in RCTs, especially in those studies in which no OS difference is found. Despite the improved quality of HRQOL methodology reporting, certain aspects remain underrepresented. Our findings suggest need for an international standardization of HRQOL reporting similar to the CONSORT guidelines for clinical findings.

Lung cancer: New biological insights and recent therapeutic advances

Approximately 1.6 million new cases of lung cancer are diagnosed each year throughout the world. In many countries, the mortality related to lung cancer continues to rise. The outcomes for patients with all stages of lung cancer have improved in recent years. The use of systemic therapy in conjunction with local therapy has led to improved cure rates in both resectable and unresectable patient groups. For patients with advanced stage disease, modest but real improvements in overall survival and quality of life have been achieved with systemic chemotherapy. A major focus of research has been the development of molecularly targeted agents and the identification of biomarkers for patient selection. Patients with non-small cell lung cancer with mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase domain achieve response rates of greater than 70% and superior progression-free survival when treated with an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor compared with standard chemotherapy. This has now emerged as the preferred therapeutic approach for the subset of patients with a mutation in exons 19 or 21 of the EGFR. Another promising targeted approach involves the use of an anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor in patients with a translocation involving the echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 (EML4) and -ALK genes. Finally, a paradigm shift in favor of maintenance therapy for patients with advanced stage disease has gained strength from recent data. All of these advances have been made possible by developing a greater understanding of the biology, the discovery of novel anticancer agents, and improved supportive care measures. This article reviews the major strides made in the treatment of lung cancer in the recent past.

A phase I trial of sorafenib combined with cisplatin/etoposide or carboplatin/pemetrexed in refractory solid tumor patients

INTRODUCTION

Sorafenib has demonstrated single agent activity in non-small cell (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Carboplatin/pemetrexed (CbP) and cisplatin/etoposide (PE) are commonly used in the treatment of these diseases.

METHODS

A phase I trial escalating doses of sorafenib in combination with fixed doses of PE (Arm A) or CbP (Arm B) was performed using a 3-patient cohort design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLT); DLT were assessed in the first cycle. The trial was subsequently amended with closure of Arm B and to include Arm C with a reduced dose of carboplatin.

RESULTS

Between 9/2007 and 9/2008, 20 pts were treated on the trial; median age 62 (range 42-73), male/female ratio 12/8, PS 0/1 ratio 6/14, and median number of prior therapies 2 (range 1-4). The most common tumor types were NSCLC and SCLC. On Arm A at dose level 0 (sorafenib 200 mg BID), 2 of 4 patients experienced DLT; 2 patients were enrolled at dose level -1 (sorafenib 200 mg QD) without DLT, but this arm was closed due to slow accrual. On Arm B, 2 of 3 patients experienced DLT at dose level 0 (sorafenib 200 mg BID). On Arm C at dose level 0 (sorafenib 200 mg BID), 1 of 6 patients experienced DLT, and at dose level +1 (sorafenib 400 mg BID) 2 of 5 patients experienced a DLT.

CONCLUSIONS

The MTD of sorafenib was 200 mg BID continuously in combination with carboplatin (AUC of 5) and pemetrexed 500 mg/m² every 3 weeks. However, only 6 patients were treated at this dose level, and the results should be interpreted cautiously.

[American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline update on chemotherapy for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer]

本文旨在为Ⅳ期非小细胞肺癌患者的治疗提供更新版推荐。本文资料检索源自2002年以来公布的相关随机试验文献。此指南范围限于化疗与生物治疗。更新委员会对这些文献进行了总结并提供了推荐更新。162篇文献符合标准被纳入参考。本推荐基于可改善总生存期的治疗方法。仅改善无进展生存期的治疗方法推动了对毒性及生存质量的监测。对于体力状态评分为0分或1分患者的一线治疗，可推荐以铂类为基础的细胞毒性药物的两药联用。对铂类治疗有禁忌的患者，可采用非铂类细胞毒性两药联合。对于体力状态评分为2分的患者，单一细胞毒性药物即可。对于疾病进展或经过4个周期的治疗仍对治疗无反应的患者，应停止一线细胞毒性化疗。即使在6个周期后患者对治疗仍有反应，亦应停止两药细胞毒性化疗。对于伴有明确的表皮生长因子受体（epidermal growth factor receptor, EGFR）突变的患者，可推荐一线采用吉非替尼治疗；对于EGFR突变为阴性或不明确的患者，细胞毒性化疗更佳。除具有特定临床特征的患者外，可推荐贝伐单抗与卡铂-紫杉醇联用。对于通过免疫组化证实EGFR阳性的肿瘤患者，可推荐西妥昔单抗与顺铂-长春瑞滨联用。多西紫杉醇、厄洛替尼、吉非替尼或培美曲塞被推荐作为二线治疗。对于未曾接受过厄洛替尼或吉非替尼治疗的患者，可推荐厄洛替尼作为三线治疗。现有数据不足以推荐常规三线采用细胞毒性药物。已有的证据也不足以推荐常规应用分子标记物选择化疗。

First-line systemic chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) frequently presents at an incurable stage, and a majority of patients will be considered for palliative chemotherapy at some point in their disease. This article reviews the growing evidence for first-line treatment in NSCLC.

METHODS

Studies of first-line chemotherapy regimens including new agents (docetaxel, gemcitabine, irinotecan, paclitaxel, pemetrexed, and vinorelbine) and targeted agents (bevacizumab, erlotinib, and gefitinib) were identified through Medline, Embase, the Cochrane databases, and web sites of guideline organizations.

RESULTS

Two evidence-based guidelines, 10 systematic reviews, and forty-six randomized trials were eligible for inclusion. Randomized studies suggest that platinum-based doublets (platinum plus new agent) are the standard of care for first-line systemic therapy. No one new agent is clearly superior for use in combination with a platinum agent. The survival advantage of platinum-based doublets over nonplatinum combinations or older combinations is modest. The addition of bevacizumab to carboplatin and paclitaxel has shown improved survival, although multiple exclusion criteria limit the applicability of these data to a subset of patients. In patients at least 70 years of age or with Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group performance status 2, a new single agent is an alternative. Treatment beyond four to six cycles impedes quality of life without prolonging life. Emerging data suggest that the choice of chemotherapy agent may be influenced by histologic subtype.

CONCLUSION

In NSCLC, a combination of a platinum agent plus a new agent continues to be the standard of care. As differences between regimens are small, toxicity and patient preference should help guide regimen choice.

New strategies to overcome limitations of reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy in non-small cell lung cancer

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), a member of the HER family of receptors, has become a well-established target for the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Several EGFR-targeted agents produce objective responses in a minority of unselected patients, but a majority of those with EGFR-activating mutations; however, all responders eventually develop resistance. The modest activity of agents that target only EGFR may be due, in part, to the complexity and interdependency of HER family signaling. The interdependent signaling that occurs between EGFR and HER2 provides a rationale for the simultaneous inhibition of these receptors with reversible and irreversible inhibitors. Several agents with activity against both EGFR and HER2 are currently under development. Irreversible EGFR/HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (e.g., BIBW 2992, HKI-272) and pan-HER TKIs (e.g., PF00299804) comprise a novel class of agents in clinical development that may prevent and overcome inherent and acquired resistance to first-generation reversible EGFR TKIs. Other agents in development include the monoclonal antibody pertuzumab, and XL-647, which inhibits EGFR and HER2, as well as multiple vascular endothelial growth factor receptor family members. Here we briefly review the currently available EGFR-targeted agents, discuss the rationale for extending inhibition to other HER family members, weigh the merits of irreversible HER family inhibition, and summarize preclinical and clinical data with EGFR/HER2 and pan-HER inhibitors under clinical development.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline update on chemotherapy for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer

The purpose of this article is to provide updated recommendations for the treatment of patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer. A literature search identified relevant randomized trials published since 2002. The scope of the guideline was narrowed to chemotherapy and biologic therapy. An Update Committee reviewed the literature and made updated recommendations. One hundred sixty-two publications met the inclusion criteria. Recommendations were based on treatment strategies that improve overall survival. Treatments that improve only progression-free survival prompted scrutiny of toxicity and quality of life. For first-line therapy in patients with performance status of 0 or 1, a platinum-based two-drug combination of cytotoxic drugs is recommended. Nonplatinum cytotoxic doublets are acceptable for patients with contraindications to platinum therapy. For patients with performance status of 2, a single cytotoxic drug is sufficient. Stop first-line cytotoxic chemotherapy at disease progression or after four cycles in patients who are not responding to treatment. Stop two-drug cytotoxic chemotherapy at six cycles even in patients who are responding to therapy. The first-line use of gefitinib may be recommended for patients with known epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation; for negative or unknown EGFR mutation status, cytotoxic chemotherapy is preferred. Bevacizumab is recommended with carboplatin-paclitaxel, except for patients with certain clinical characteristics. Cetuximab is recommended with cisplatin-vinorelbine for patients with EGFR-positive tumors by immunohistochemistry. Docetaxel, erlotinib, gefitinib, or pemetrexed is recommended as second-line therapy. Erlotinib is recommended as third-line therapy for patients who have not received prior erlotinib or gefitinib. Data are insufficient to recommend the routine third-line use of cytotoxic drugs. Data are insufficient to recommend routine use of molecular markers to select chemotherapy.

A randomized, phase III multicenter trial of gemcitabine in combination with carboplatin or paclitaxel versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Paclitaxel-carboplatin is used as the standard regimen for patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This trial was designed to compare gemcitabine + carboplatin or gemcitabine + paclitaxel to the standard regimen.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 1135 chemonaive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were randomly allocated to receive gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 plus carboplatin area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) 5.5 on day 1 (GC), gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) on day 1 (GP), or paclitaxel 225 mg/m(2) plus carboplatin AUC 6.0 on day 1 (PC). Stratification was based on disease stage, baseline weight loss, and presence or absence of brain metastases. Cycles were repeated every 21 days for up to six cycles or disease progression.

RESULTS

Median survival (months) with GC was 7.9 compared with 8.5 for GP and 8.7 for PC. Response rates (RRs) were as follows: GC, 25.3%; GP, 32.1%; and PC, 29.8%. The GC arm was associated with a greater incidence of grade 3 or 4 hematologic events but a lower rate of neurotoxicity and alopecia when compared with GP and PC.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-platinum and non-paclitaxel gemcitabine-containing doublets demonstrate similar overall survival and RR compared with the standard PC regimen. However, the treatment arms had distinct toxicity profiles.

Phase II, multicenter, uncontrolled trial of single-agent sorafenib in patients with relapsed or refractory, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

Sorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor that targets the Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK mitogenic signaling pathway and the angiogenic receptor tyrosine kinases, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 and platelet-derived growth factor receptor beta. We evaluated the antitumor response and tolerability of sorafenib in patients with relapsed or refractory, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), most of whom had received prior platinum-based chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a phase II, single-arm, multicenter study. Patients with relapsed or refractory advanced NSCLC received sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily until tumor progression or an unacceptable drug-related toxicity occurred. The primary objective was to measure response rate.

RESULTS

Of 54 patients enrolled, 52 received sorafenib. The predominant histologies were adenocarcinoma (54%) and squamous cell carcinoma (31%). No complete or partial responses were observed. Stable disease (SD) was achieved in 30 (59%) of the 51 patients who were evaluable for efficacy. Four patients with SD developed tumor cavitation. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.7 months, and median overall survival was 6.7 months. Patients with SD had a median PFS of 5.5 months. Major grades 3 to 4, treatment-related toxicities included hand-foot skin reaction (10%), hypertension (4%), fatigue (2%), and diarrhea (2%). Nine patients died within a 30-day period after discontinuing sorafenib, and one patient experienced pulmonary hemorrhage that was considered drug related. CONCLUSION Continuous treatment with sorafenib 400 mg twice daily was associated with disease stabilization in patients with advanced NSCLC. The broad activity of sorafenib and its acceptable toxicity profile suggest that additional investigation of sorafenib as therapy for patients with NSCLC is warranted.

Duration of Chemotherapy for Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Purpose

To determine if it is preferable to extend chemotherapy beyond a standard number of cycles in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for advanced non–small-cell lung cancer.

Methods

We searched biomedical literature databases and conference proceedings for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a defined number of cycles with continuation of the same chemotherapy until disease progression, a larger defined number of cycles of identical chemotherapy, and a defined number of cycles of identical initial chemotherapy followed by additional cycles of an alternative chemotherapy. Meta-analysis was performed using the fixed effect model. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS); secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AE), and health-related quality of life (HRQL).

Results

We found 13 RCTs including 3,027 patients. Extending chemotherapy improved PFS substantially (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.81; P < .00001) and OS modestly (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.99; P = .03). Subgroup analysis revealed that effects on PFS were greater for trials extending chemotherapy with third-generation regimens rather than older regimens (HR, 0.70 interaction v 0.92 interaction; P = .003). Extending chemotherapy was associated with more frequent AE in all trials where it was reported and impaired HRQL in two of seven trials.

Conclusion

Extending chemotherapy, particularly with a third-generation regimen, improved PFS substantially, but OS less so. Future trials should test extending treatment with more effective and/or better-tolerated agents.

Dose-escalating and pharmacokinetic study of a weekly combination of paclitaxel and carboplatin for inoperable non-small cell lung cancer: JCOG 9910-DI

OBJECTIVE

Combined paclitaxel and carboplatin is a standard regimen for inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although an every-3-week schedule is common, weekly paclitaxel is clinically effective for various cancers. A Phase I clinical trial was conducted to determine maximum-tolerated doses (MTDs) for weekly combined paclitaxel and carboplatin, and to evaluate anti-tumor response, toxicity and pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel in patients with inoperable NSCLC.

METHODS

Twenty patients with inoperable NSCLC received weekly carboplatin at area under the curve (AUC) = 2 mg/ml min and paclitaxel. Paclitaxel was escalated if MTD was not reached. Three patients each were entered at levels 1 and 2 (level 1, paclitaxel 50 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC = 2 mg/ml min; level 2, 60/2), six at level 3 (70/2), five at level 4 (80/2) and three at level 5 (90/2).

RESULTS

One patient had grade 4 (G4) neutropenia at level 2, one had G3 hepatic toxicity at level 3 and one had G3 cardiac toxicity at level 4. MTD was not reached for all dose levels. Response rate (RR) was 35% (7/20) and median survival was 11.1 months. Severe neutropenia (G3 and G4) was seen in seven patients associated with greater AUC, peak concentration (C(max)) and the duration of plasma concentration >50 ng/ml of paclitaxel.

CONCLUSIONS

Weekly combined paclitaxel (up to 90 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (AUC = 2 mg/ml min) was well tolerated. A higher dose intensity of paclitaxel can be given, and RR and survival are not less than the every-3-week protocol. The weekly regimen is an alternative for untreated inoperable NSCLC patients.

Circulating endothelial cells in non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with carboplatin and paclitaxel

INTRODUCTION

Circulating endothelial cells (CECs) increase in cancer patients and play an important role in tumor neovascularization.

METHODS

This study was designed to investigate the role of CEC as a marker for predicting the effectiveness of a carboplatin plus paclitaxel based first line chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

RESULTS

The CEC count in 4 ml of peripheral blood before starting chemotherapy (baseline value) was significantly higher in NSCLC patients, ranging from 32 to 4501/4 ml (n = 31, mean +/- SD = 595 +/- 832), than in healthy volunteers (n = 53, 46.2 +/- 86.3). We did not detect a significant correlation between the CEC count and estimated tumor volume. CECs were significantly decreased by chemotherapy as compared with pretreatment values (175.6 +/- 24 and 173.0 +/- 24, day +8, +22, respectively). We investigated the correlation between baseline CEC and the clinical effectiveness of chemotherapy. CEC values are significantly higher in patients with clinical benefit (partial response and stable disease, 516 +/- 458, 870.8 +/- 1215, respectively) than in progressive disease patients (211 +/- 150). Furthermore, a statistically significant decrease in CECs, on day 22, was observed only in patients with partial response. Patients who had a baseline CEC count greater than 400/4 ml showed a longer progression-free survival (>400, 271 days [range: 181-361] versus <400, 34 [range: 81-186], p = 0.019).

CONCLUSION

CEC is suggested to be a promising predictive marker of the clinical efficacy of the CBDCA plus paclitaxel regimen in patients with NSCLC.

Phase I study of amrubicin and vinorelbine in non-small cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Combination chemotherapy comprising amrubicin and vinorelbine as a second-line therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has not been fully evaluated. To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose (RD), the present phase I study examined patients with advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

The subjects were nine patients with histologically confirmed advanced NSCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, prior platinum-based first-line chemotherapy, and measurable or evaluable lesions. Treatment consisted of five dose levels, with amrubicin 35-45 mg/m2 administered as a 5-min intravenous infusion on days 1-3 and vinorelbine 15-25 mg/m2 given as a 1-h intravenous infusion on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

All patients had received carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line therapy. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was seen in two of six patients (febrile neutropenia and deep vein thrombosis ) at level 1, allowing us to conduct level 2. At level 2, all three patients experienced DLT (leucopenia > or =4 days in one patient; febrile neutropenia in three patients; and infection in two patients), and this level was determined as the MTD. Subsequently, level 1 (amrubicin 35 mg/m2 and vinorelbine 15 mg/m2) was defined as the RD. Responses in the nine patients included a partial response in one patient and stable disease in four patients.

CONCLUSION

As second-line therapy, the RD of the combination of amrubicin and vinorelbine is 35 mg/m2 and 15 mg/m2, respectively. Further study should proceed to clarify the efficacy of this regimen.

Cisplatin versus carboplatin in NSCLC: is there one "best" answer?

Platinum-based chemotherapeutic doublets have produced significant survival benefits for patients with non-small cell lung cancer of all disease stages. The optimal combination of chemotherapy has been the subject of much investigation, and the ideal platinum agent the subject of ongoing and heated debate. For patients with resected disease, all evidence of survival advantage rests with cisplatin, and the only clinical trial to evaluate carboplatin-based therapy failed to show a survival benefit. In the setting of locally advanced lung cancer, no comparative data exist, and even randomized phase III trials are largely lacking. Cisplatin-based doublets provide the most consistent evidence of superior survival when coupled with definitive thoracic radiation. Meta-analyses of palliative chemotherapy indicate consistent survival advantages with cisplatin-based therapy over carboplatin; however, the relative advantage is small. Cisplatin carries a higher toxicity profile, including nausea, vomiting, neuropathy, renal insufficiency, and alopecia in comparison to carboplatin. When the goal of therapy is curative, the survival benefits with cisplatin are in most circumstances worth the increased toxicities. When the goal of therapy is palliation, the relative price of toxicity needs to be weighed on the basis of the individual patient in an effort to maximize quality of life.

Emerging ethnic differences in lung cancer therapy

Although global clinical trials for lung cancer can enable the development of new agents efficiently, whether the results of clinical trials performed in one population can be fully extrapolated to another population remains questionable. A comparison of phase III trials for the same drug combinations against lung cancer in different countries shows a great diversity in haematological toxicity. One possible reason for this diversity may be that different ethnic populations may have different physiological capacities for white blood cell production and maturation. In addition, polymorphisms in the promoter and coding regions of drug-metabolising enzymes (e.g., CYP3A4 and UGT1A1) or in transporters (e.g., ABCB1) may vary among different ethnic populations. For example, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors are more effective in Asian patients than in patients of other ethnicities, a characteristic that parallels the incidence of EGFR-activating mutations. Interstitial lung disease associated with the administration of gefitinib is also more common among Japanese patients than among patients of other ethnicities. Although research into these differences has just begun, these studies suggest that possible pharmacogenomic and tumour genetic differences associated with individual responses to anticancer agents should be carefully considered when conducting global clinical trials.

Improving health-related quality of life in non-small-cell lung cancer with current treatment options

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for > 80% of all lung carcinomas, with the majority of patients presenting with late-stage disease. Selection of an appropriate therapy depends on the stage of disease, with treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC often aimed at palliation of symptoms and improving the well-being of patients. Health-related quality of life (QOL) has been largely ignored as an endpoint in clinical trials for NSCLC, but there is increasing acceptance by clinicians and regulatory authorities that alleviation of symptoms and improved health-related QOL should be carefully considered. This article discusses current approaches to measuring health-related QOL. This discussion is followed by a brief review of some of the current treatment options for patients with NSCLC and their effect on health-related QOL.

Systematic review of symptom control and quality of life in studies on chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: how CONSORTed are the data?

BACKGROUND

The effect of chemotherapy on survival of patients with advanced NSCLC is modest, therefore patient reported outcomes (PRO's) are of high interest in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). CONSORT (CONsolidated Standards On Reporting Trials) is a quality checklist of 22 items for the conduct and reporting of RCTs. The aim of this report was to analyse to what extent the different RCTs with information on PRO's adhere to the CONSORT statement.

METHODS

Systematic review of RCTs using PRO's either as primary or secondary endpoint. Compliance with the (revised) CONSORT statement was checked by 2 independent reviewers by making for each study the simple sum of the 22 CONSORT items, or a weighted score with a maximum rating of 31 points.

RESULTS

The median weighted CONSORT score of the different RCTs was 25, with a remarkable difference from 12 till 30. There was no significant change over time, nor difference between academic and commercial studies, but a significant correlation between CONSORT agreement and journal type (P<0.0001). Adherence to CONSORT was similar for studies comparing chemotherapy with best supportive care alone, comparing different first-line chemotherapies with PRO either as primary or secondary endpoint, or studies looking at second-line chemotherapy. Benefit in PRO's was reported in all of these settings.

CONCLUSION

The overall adherence of peer-reviewed RCTs to CONSORT is reasonable, with nonetheless major differences between journals, and with no clear sign of change over time. Apart from modest survival differences, benefits in PRO endpoints are present in all categories of studies we analysed.

Systemic chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: recent advances and future directions

Systemic therapy improves the survival and quality of life of patients with advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Several new therapeutic options have emerged for advanced NSCLC, incorporating novel cytotoxic agents (taxanes, gemcitabine, pemetrexed) and molecular-targeted agents (erlotinib, bevacizumab). Efforts to improve the outcome of first-line therapy for advanced and metastatic NSCLC have primarily focused on the addition of targeted agents to platinum-based two-drug regimens. Bevacizumab, an antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor, is the first drug to demonstrate superior outcomes when added to systemic chemotherapy in advanced disease. Evaluation of the role of maintenance therapy following four to six cycles of first-line combination chemotherapy is ongoing. Both cytotoxic agents and targeted agents are suitable for evaluation in the maintenance setting. Promising results have been noted with single-agent paclitaxel as maintenance therapy following four cycles of combination therapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Phase III studies are now under way to evaluate the roles of gemcitabine, pemetrexed, and erlotinib as maintenance therapies for patients who experience a response or disease stabilization after four cycles of combination chemotherapy. Whether this approach will be successful in extending the survival of a select group of patients remains to be seen.

Randomized, phase III study of weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin versus standard every-3-weeks administration of carboplatin and paclitaxel for patients with previously untreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety of weekly paclitaxel in combination with carboplatin administered every 4 weeks to the standard regimen of paclitaxel and carboplatin administered every 3 weeks for the treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Four hundred forty-four patients with previously untreated stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were randomly assigned to either arm 1 (n = 223), paclitaxel 100 mg/m(2) weekly for 3 of 4 weeks with carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) = 6 mg/mL x min on day 1 of each 4 week cycle, or arm 2 (n = 221), paclitaxel 225 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC = 6 on day 1 of each 3-week cycle. After four cycles of therapy, patients in both treatment arms were eligible to continue weekly paclitaxel (70 mg/m(2), 3 of 4 weeks) as maintenance therapy until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression.

RESULTS

The objective response rate was 27.6% for arm 1 and 19.2% for arm 2. Median time to progression (TTP) was 18.4 and median survival (MS) was 38.6 weeks for arm 1. For arm 2, the median TTP and MS were 16.7 weeks and 42.9 weeks respectively. Grade 3/4 anemia was more common with arm 1, although grade 2/3 neuropathy and arthralgia were less common. The remainder of the toxicities were similar between the two arms.

CONCLUSION

All efficacy parameters were similar between the two treatment arms. The favorable nonhematologic toxicity profile of arm 1 makes this an alternative treatment option for patients with advanced NSCLC.

A systematic review of quality of life associated with standard chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

Systemic chemotherapy is accepted as a standard of care for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although survival outcomes are equivalent among standard chemotherapy regimens, it is unknown whether the quality of life (QOL) outcomes are also comparable. We evaluated available literatures to summarize the state of current knowledge and provide suggestions for future studies.

METHODS

Using PUBMED/MEDLINE database, a systematic review of randomized controlled phase III trials of advanced NSCLC reporting QOL as one of the end points was conducted. Trials were included if standard chemotherapy regimens (as defined by The American Society of Clinical Oncology 2003 recommendations) were used in at least two arms of a trial. Two reviewers independently extracted data and evaluated the characteristics of QOL reporting, analyses, and results.

RESULTS

The search criteria identified 14 trials (6665 patients). Of these, 13 trials used validated QOL instruments and were included for review. The QOL reporting/analysis techniques were heterogeneous. We included nine trials, which reported the rate of completed baseline assessment and compliance survivors at analysis greater than 50%, for data synthesis. Of these, only one trial found a significant difference in QOL between the comparator arms: paclitaxel plus cisplatin was better than teniposide plus cisplatin.

CONCLUSION

Based on our review, it seems unlikely that a major difference exists in the global QOL associated with standard chemotherapy regimens for advanced NSCLC. Although QOL reporting format is largely acceptable, a lack of uniformity in analysis and a poor compliance to QOL assessment made between-trial comparisons difficult.

Phase II trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel in non-small cell lung cancer patients previously treated with chemotherapy

The purpose of this phase II trial was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of carboplatin plus paclitaxel in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with chemotherapy. Patients with a performance status (PS) of 0 or 1 who had received one or two previous chemotherapy regimens for advanced NSCLC were eligible. Paclitaxel 200mg/m(2) was infused over 3h and followed by carboplatin (area under the curve 6) infusion over 1h, once every 3 weeks. Thirty patients were enrolled. A complete response was observed in 1 patient and a partial response in 10 patients, for an overall response rate of 36.7%. The median time to progression was 5.3 months. The median survival time was 9.9 months, and the 1-year survival rate was 47%. Hematological toxicity in the form of grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 54%, but grade 3 febrile neutropenia developed in only 3%. Non-hematological grade 3 toxicities were less frequent. There were no treatment-related deaths. The combination of carboplatin plus paclitaxel is an active and well-tolerated regimen for the treatment of NSCLC patients who have previously been treated with chemotherapy and have a good PS.

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing carboplatin-based to cisplatin-based chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

Since the debate still exists whether cisplatin-based and carboplatin-based chemotherapy are equally effective for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a meta-analysis of trials was performed to compare the cisplatin-based with carboplatin-based regimens in first line chemotherapy of advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database, the Physician Data Query (PDQ) database and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meeting abstracts in January 2007. The following keywords were used: "non small cell lung cancer," or "Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung". Reference lists of original articles and review articles were also examined. The published languages and years were not limited. The trials searched were evaluated for eligibility and quality, and then the data were abstracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

Eighteen randomized controlled trials (6906 patients) were identified from 4240 reports. The intention to treatment (ITT) analysis demonstrated that the cisplatin-based regimens had a higher overall response rate in comparison with carboplatin-based regimens (RR, 0.91; 95%CI, 0.84-0.99; P=0.02). However, the 1-year survival rate for the two platinum-based regimens were comparable (RR, 1.00, 95%CI, 0.94-1.07; P=0.93), Both subgroup analysis comparing the doublet or triplet regimens of cisplatin or carboplatin in combination with new agents and the same agents had achieved the same results. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy led to more frequent grade 3 or 4 of nausea and vomiting, and nephrotoxicity (OR, 0.39; 95%CI, 0.30-0.52; P<0.00001 and OR, 0.31; 95%CI, 0.17-0.56; P=0.0001), while carboplatin-based chemotherapy inclined to developing more grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia, however, there were no statistical significance (OR, 1.63; 95%CI, 0.94-2.82; P=0.08). The risk of grade 3 or 4 anemia, neutropenia and neurotoxicity was almost comparable between the two arms (OR, 0.78; 95%CI, 0.59-1.02; P=0.07; OR, 1.08; 95%CI, 0.80-1.45; P=0.61 and OR, 1.59; 95%CI, 0.81-3.14; P=0.18, respectively). The subgroup analyses of the comparison between the doublet or triplet regimens of cisplatin and carboplatin in combination with the same agents, respectively, also achieved similar results, with the exception of thrombocytopenia between the two groups (OR, 1.94; 95%CI, 1.47-2.68; P<0.00001), which showed statistically significant. Cisplatin arm inclined to causing more treatment-related deaths compared as carboplatin arm, but there was no statistical significance (OR, 0.70; 95%CI, 0.48-1.02; P=0.06).

CONCLUSION

Given cisplatin-based regimens had a higher overall response rate as compared with carboplatin-based regimens, there was not a survival advantage in the cisplatin group. Therefore, the toxicity profile might play an important role in decision to choose cisplatin-based or carboplatin-based regimens.

Feasibility and efficacy of molecular analysis-directed individualized therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

The treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is based on clinical trials experience. Molecular characteristics that impact metabolism and efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents are not used for decision making. Ribonucleotide reductase subunit 1 (RRM1) is crucial for nucleotide metabolism, and it is the dominant molecular determinant of gemcitabine efficacy. Excision repair cross-complementing group 1 gene (ERCC1), a component of the nucleotide excision repair complex, is important for platinum-induced DNA adduct repair. We hypothesized that selection of double-agent chemotherapy based on tumoral RRM1 and ERCC1 expression would be feasible and beneficial for patients with advanced NSCLC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective phase II clinical trial in patients with advanced NSCLC. Patients were required to have a dedicated tumor biopsy for determination of RRM1 and ERCC1 gene expression by real-time quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Double-agent chemotherapy consisting of carboplatin, gemcitabine, docetaxel, and vinorelbine was selected based on gene expression. Disease response and patient survival were monitored.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients were registered, 75 had the required biopsy without significant complications, 60 fulfilled all eligibility criteria, and gene expression analysis was not feasible in five patients. RRM1 expression ranged from 0 to 1,637, ERCC1 expression ranged from 1 to 8,103, and their expression was correlated (Spearman's rho = 0.46; P < .01). Disease response was 44%. Overall survival was 59% and progression-free survival was 14% at 12 months, with a median of 13.3 and 6.6 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Therapeutic decision making based on RRM1 and ERCC1 gene expression for patients with advanced NSCLC is feasible and promising for improvement in patient outcome

Adjuvant chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer

Cisplatin must be considered the treatment standard for lung cancer chemotherapy, whatever the disease setting, at least in the Western world. After the seminal meta-analysis published in 1995, 12 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) exploring the benefits of adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy have been completed, published, or presented. Although all these RCTs differ in patient features, two common suggestions emerge when the stage is taken into account: a significant benefit for chemotherapy is demonstrated for stage II and IIIA patients and none of these trials showed any significant benefit for adjuvant chemotherapy in stage IB patients. Ten years after this meta-analysis, a further individual patient data-pooled analysis exploring the eventual benefits of adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy after surgery for early stage non-small cell lung cancer in the more recent RCTs has been presented. The 5-year overall survival benefit in favor of cisplatin-based chemotherapy was 5.3% (48.8% versus 43.3%, p = 0.004), with a relative risk reduction of 11%. These results confirm those reported by previous meta-analyses performed according to a literature-based approach. Advances are emerging in the selection of those patients who are likely to benefit more from such treatment. In this respect, the customized therapy based on molecular/genetic patient and disease features constitutes a new avenue to pursue.

Induction chemoradiotherapy (carboplatin-taxane and concurrent 50-Gy radiation) for bulky cN2, N3 non–small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

To improve the prognosis of cN2, N3 non-small cell lung cancer, we performed induction chemoradiotherapy (carboplatin-taxane chemotherapy and concurrent 50-Gy radiation) followed by surgery.

METHODS

Patients with pathologically proven non-small cell lung cancer with bulky cN2, N3 disease were enrolled. Forty-one patients underwent an operation after chemoradiotherapy from January 2000 to April 2006. Either carboplatin-paclitaxel (n = 19) or carboplatin-docetaxel (n = 22) chemotherapy was randomly used. Two cycles of chemotherapy were performed with concurrent radiation (50 Gy). In all cases, conventional radiological reevaluations were performed; in the latest 21 cases, reevaluations with positron-emission tomography with fludeoxyglucose F 18 were also performed.

RESULTS

In all 41 cases, complete resections were performed, with no operative mortality. The histologically complete response rate, major response rate, and minor response rate were 17.1% (7/41), 56.1% (23/41), and 26.8% (11/41), respectively. The 5-year overall survival was 52.7%. There were no differences in survival between taxane groups. Both the complete response and the major response groups revealed a significantly better 5-year survivals than the minor response group (85.7%, P = .044, 52.4%, P = .01). Even with persistent N2 disease, the 5-year survival in the major response group (66%) was promising. With the combination of conventional computed tomography and positron-emission tomography with fludeoxyglucose F 18 for reevaluation, eligible patients could be selected for this protocol.

CONCLUSION

Surgery after chemoradiotherapy (carboplatin-taxane and 50-Gy radiation) for bulky cN2, N3 non-small cell lung cancer can be safely performed with promising results. Even with persistent N2 disease, the survival in the major response group was promising.

Chemotherapy dose--response relationships in non-small cell lung cancer and implied resistance mechanisms

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized excess resistance factor ("active resistance") gives a dose--response curve (DRC) shoulder, deficiency of a factor required for drug sensitivity ("saturable passive resistance") gives a DRC terminal plateau, and alteration of a factor gives decreased DRC slope.

METHOD

We used response rates from published non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) clinical studies to estimate mean percent tumor cell kill in each study (assuming cell kill is proportional to tumor volume change) and performed regression and meta-regression analyses of percent cell survival and patient survival vs planned dose-intensity.

RESULTS

As single agents, cell kill approached that of combinations only at highest doses. While DRC shape varied between single agents, DRCs for all combinations tested flattened at higher doses. Patient median survival times also failed to vary significantly with dose for any combination.

CONCLUSIONS

DRC flattening at higher doses suggests therapy efficacy is limited by deficiency/saturation of factors required for cell killing. Based on this and other clinical observations, we hypothesize: (1) active resistance may modulate cell killing at lower doses, but ability to overcome this by increasing doses is limited by saturable passive resistance (e.g. by non-cycling cells). (2) Cells surviving initial chemotherapy may upregulate active resistance mechanisms (permitting growth despite therapy). (3) If active resistance mechanisms are insufficient for growth/survival, cells may survive until therapy cessation by downregulating metabolism/cycling, becoming temporarily quiescent. This could help explain broad cross-resistance between agents and would imply that improved targeting of non-cycling cells will be required for major improvement in therapy efficacy.

Randomized phase III study of cisplatin plus irinotecan versus carboplatin plus paclitaxel, cisplatin plus gemcitabine, and cisplatin plus vinorelbine for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: Four-Arm Cooperative Study in Japan

BACKGROUND

To compare the efficacy and toxicity of three platinum-based combination regimens against cisplatin plus irinotecan (IP) in patients with untreated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) by a non-inferiority design.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 602 patients were randomly assigned to one of four regimens: cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus irinotecan 60 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15 every 4 weeks (IP) carboplatin AUC 6.0 min x mg/mL (area under the concentration-time curve) on day 1 plus paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 3 weeks (TC); cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 every 3 weeks (GP); and cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 plus vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 every 3 weeks (NP).

RESULTS

The response rate, median survival time, and 1-year survival rate were 31.0%, 13.9 months, 59.2%, respectively, in IP; 32.4%, 12.3 months, 51.0% in TC; 30.1%, 14.0 months, 59.6% in GP; and 33.1%, 11.4 months, 48.3% in NP. No statistically significant differences were found in response rate or overall survival, but the non-inferiority of none of the experimental regimens could be confirmed. All the four regimens were well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

The four regimens have similar efficacy and different toxicity profiles, and they can be used to treat advanced NSCLC patients.

Pharmacogenomics: a reality or still a promise?

Although notable progress has been made in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in recent years, this disease is still associated with a poor prognosis for most patients. Modern techniques have facilitated the identification of specific genetic factors that may play a role in disease progression and patient response to therapy, prompting research efforts to identify the clinical predictors of outcome for NSCLC. Recent evidence suggests that the application of a pharmacogenomic approach has the potential to greatly improve survival in certain subpopulations of patients with NSCLC, which could profoundly influence the decision-making process used in evolving treatment strategies for this malignancy.

A phase III trial of docetaxel/carboplatin versus mitomycin C/ifosfamide/cisplatin (MIC) or mitomycin C/vinblastine/cisplatin (MVP) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomised multicentre trial of the British Thoracic Oncology Group (BTOG1)

BACKGROUND

Phase III studies suggest that non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with cisplatin-docetaxel may have higher response rates and better survival compared with other platinum-based regimens. We report the final results of a randomised phase III study of docetaxel and carboplatin versus MIC or MVP in patients with advanced NSCLC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with biopsy proven stage III-IV NSCLC not suitable for curative surgery or radiotherapy were randomised to receive four cycles of either DCb (docetaxel 75 mg/m(2), carboplatin AUC 6), or MIC/MVP (mitomycin 6 mg/m(2), ifosfamide 3 g/m(2) and cisplatin 50 mg/m(2) or mitomycin 6 mg/m(2), vinblastine 6 mg/m(2) and cisplatin 50 mg/m(2), respectively), 3 weekly. The primary end point was survival, secondary end points included response rates, toxicity and quality of life.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 17.4 months. Overall response rate was 32% for both arms (partial response = 31%, complete response = 1%); 32% of MIC/MVP and 26% of DCb patients had stable disease. One-year survival was 39% and 35% for DCb and MIC/MVP, respectively. Two-year survival was 13% with both arms. Grade 3/4 neutropenia (74% versus 43%, P < 0.005), infection (18% versus 9%, P = 0.01) and mucositis (5% versus 1%, P = 0.02) were more common with DCb than MIC/MVP. The MIC/MVP arm had significant worsening in overall EORTC score and global health status whereas the DCb arm showed no significant change.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of DCb had similar efficacy to MIC/MVP but quality of life was better maintained.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: the past, the present and the future

Complete resection is mandatory in order to achieve a cure in patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, despite complete resection, a substantial proportion of patients have disease recurrence, with distant metastases being the primary sites of failure. Recent trials have conclusively demonstrated the benefit of platinum-based adjuvant therapy in patients with resected stage IB and II NSCLC. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in resected stage III NSCLC is less clear, with trials showing conflicting results. The role of targeted agents in this setting is being investigated. Gene expression profiling studies should help direct chemotherapy to those who would actually benefit from it, thereby saving others from unnecessary toxicity.

Common arm analysis: one approach to develop the basis for global standardization in clinical trials of non-small cell lung cancer

The global development of new anticancer treatments is desirable. However, whether results of clinical trials performed in one population can be fully extrapolated to another population remains in question. We retrospectively compared "common arms" of platinum-based doublet phase III trials among Japanese, European, and American patients with non-small cell lung cancer to develop the basis for global standardization in clinical trials. Patient demographics were very similar through all studies, indicating that extrinsic ethnic factors including socioeconomic factors, medical service background, and patient selection process for clinical trials may be consistent between geographically different oncology groups. The doses of docetaxel, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine were lower in Japanese studies. The toxicity profile was generally acceptable and similar among many studies. Thus, the dose and schedule of anticancer agents established in prior phase I and II studies conducted in each country were appropriate and applicable to large patient populations in these countries. Response rates seemed to be distributed randomly from one study to another, whereas patient survival might be better in Japanese studies. In conclusion, geographical differences in the dose of anticancer agents, response, survival and toxicity of lung cancer chemotherapy were actually observed. However, extrapolation of clinical data obtained in one country to another population and global clinical trials were considered possible with adequate dose adjustment based on dose finding studies using a carefully projected protocol.

Peptide ligands targeting integrin α3β1 in non-small cell lung cancer

Lung cancer is one of the most common cancers and is the leading cause of cancer death. We wish to identify peptide ligands for unique cell surface receptors of non-small lung cancer with the hope of developing these ligands as diagnostic and therapeutic agents. Using the method of 'one-bead one-peptide' combinatorial chemistry, a library of random cyclic octapeptides was synthesized on polystyrene beads. This library was used to screen for peptides that promoted attachment of lung adenocarcinoma cells employing a 'cell-growth-on-bead' assay. Consensus peptide sequences of cNGXGXXc were identified. These peptides promoted cell adhesion by targeting integrin alpha3beta1 over-expressed in non-small lung cancer cells. These peptide beads can be applied to capture cancer cells in malignant pleural fluid for purpose of diagnosis of lung cancer.

Second-Line Treatment Options in Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: Current Status

Despite the emergence of several antineoplastic drugs with activity in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), real progress with first-line therapy has been limited in the last decade. It has proven difficult to demonstrate important differences between third generation two-drug combinations. In contrast, progress with second-line therapy has been significant, especially in the past few years, with pemetrexed showing equivalent activity to docetaxel but with substantially less toxicity. At the same time, much work has been undertaken investigating the efficacy of the small-molecule epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors gefitinib and erlotinib in the second-line and subsequent-line settings. Erlotinib has been shown to significantly improve survival versus placebo following failure on one or two prior regimens, especially in select or targeted patient populations. Finding the optimal place and patients for these agents in NSCLC treatment will be one of the more fascinating challenges of the next few years.

Randomized, multi-center phase II trial of docetaxel plus cisplatin versus etoposide plus cisplatin as the first-line therapy for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

We prospectively conducted a multi-center, open-label, randomized phase II trial to compare the efficacy and safety of docetaxel plus cisplatin (DC) and etoposide plus cisplatin (EC) for treating advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-eight previously untreated patients with locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic NSCLC were enrolled in this study. The patients received cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 and either docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 or etoposide 100 mg/m(2) on days 1 to 3 in the DC or EC arm, respectively, every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

The objective response rate was 39.4% (15/38) and 18.4% (7/38) (p=0.023) in the DC and EC arms, respectively. The median time to progression (TTP) was 5.9 and 2.7 months (p=0.119), and the overall survival was 12.1 and 8.7 months (p=0.168) in the DC and EC arms, respectively. The prognostic factors for longer survival were an earlier disease stage (stage III, p=0.0095), the responders to DC (p=0.0174) and the adenocarcinoma histology (p=0.0454). The grades 3 and 4 toxicities were similar in both arms, with more febrile neutropenia (7.9% vs. 0%) and fatigue (7.9% vs. 0%) being noted in the DC arm.

CONCLUSION

DC offered a superior overall response rate than does EC, along with tolerable toxicity profiles, although the DC drug combination did not show significantly improved survival and TTP.