2011 Focused Update of 2009 American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update on Chemotherapy for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

The impact of erlotinib use in non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated in a private reference general hospital and in a private cancer clinic from 2005 to 2011

OBJECTIVE

To report the demographic data and clinical outcomes of non-small-cell lung cancer patients exposed to erlotinib in any line of treatment.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of nonsmall-cell lung cancer patients from a reference general hospital and a private oncology clinic, who received erlotinib from 2005 to 2011. Statistical analysis was performed and we evaluated demographic data and response to treatment, by correlating the results of this first cohort published in Brazil with results of current literature.

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients were included; 65.9% were diagnosed with adenocarcinoma, and 63.6% had metastatic disease. The mean age was 63.3 years. The median follow-up was 47.9 months. Epidermal growth factor receptor mutation screening was performed in 22.7% of patients (n=10), with mutation present in 30% of patients. The median overall survival was 46.3 months, and there was a higher probability of survival at 60 months for females compared to males (29.4% versus 15.8%; p=0.042). The other variables did not present significant statistical difference.

CONCLUSION

We collected the largest cohort of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer who have used erlotinib in Brazil to date, and demonstrated that outcomes of patients treated at our clinic during the study period were consistent with the results of current literature in similar patients.

Afatinib: A first-line treatment for selected patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

The pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, safety, adverse effects, dosage and administration, and role in therapy of afatinib in the management of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are reviewed.

SUMMARY

Afatinib (Gilotrif, Boehringer Ingelheim) is a novel oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) recently approved for the first-line treatment of patients with NSCLC whose tumors are driven by activating mutations of genes coding for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Afatinib is also an inhibitor of a specific EGFR mutation (T790M) that causes resistance to first-generation EGFR-targeted TKIs in about half of patients receiving those drugs. The recommended dosage is 40 mg once daily. In a Phase III trial completed last year, patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC who were treated with afatinib had a twofold higher response rate than those receiving standard combination chemotherapy (56% versus 23%) and significantly longer progression-free survival (11.0 months versus 5.6 months). Other studies indicated that afatinib may offer advantages over standard chemotherapy for NSCLC in terms of enhanced symptom control and quality of life and is modestly effective in cases involving EGFRT790M-related acquired resistance to the TKIs erlotinib and gefitinib. Among clinical trial participants, afatinib was generally well tolerated, with the most common grade I or II adverse events being diarrhea and rash or acne; grade III or IV events were infrequent.

CONCLUSION

Afatinib is a novel TKI that is efficacious and well tolerated in patients with NSCLC associated with activating EGFR mutations, including cases involving the T790M resistance mutation. It has possible applications in other EGFR mutation- positive cancers.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy for the Completely Resected Stage IB Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended for postoperative stage II-IIIB nonsmall cell lung cancer patients. However, its effect remains controversial in stage IB patients. We, therefore, performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy versus surgery alone in stage IB patients. Six electronic databases were searched for relevant articles. The primary and secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). The time-to-event outcomes were compared by hazard ratio using log-rank test. Sixteen eligible trials were identified. A total of 4656 patients were included and divided into 2 groups: 2338 in the chemotherapy group and 2318 in the control group (surgery only). Patients received platinum-based therapy, uracil-tegafur, or a combination of them. Our results demonstrated that patients can benefit from the adjuvant chemotherapy in terms of OS (HR 0.74 95% CI 0.63-0.88) and DFS (HR 0.64 95% CI 0.46-0.89). Patients who received 6-cycle platinum-based therapy (HR 0.45 95% CI 0.29-0.69), uracil-tegafur (HR 0.71 95% CI 0.56-0.90), or a combination of them (HR 0.51 95% CI 0.36-0.74) had better OS, but patients who received 4 or fewer cycles platinum-based therapy (HR 0.97 95% CI 0.85-1.11) did not. Moreover, 6-cycle platinum-based therapy (HR 0.29 95% CI 0.13-0.63) alone or in combination with uracil-tegafur (HR 0.44 95% CI 0.30-0.66) had advantages in DFS. However, 4 or fewer cycles of platinum-based therapy (HR 0.89 95% CI 0.76-1.04) or uracil-tegafur alone (HR 1.19 95% CI 0.79-1.80) were not beneficial. Six-cycle platinum-based chemotherapy can improve OS and DFS in stage IB NSCLC patients. Uracil-tegafur alone or in combination with platinum-based therapy is beneficial to the patients in terms of OS, but uracil-tegafur seems to have no advantage in prolonging DFS, unless it is administered with platinum-based therapy.

Expectations in the care of lung cancer

One of the main challenges oncologists face in the care of patients with lung cancer is the decision to incorporate new clinical trial data into routine clinical practice. Beyond the question of statistical significance, which is a more objective metric, are the results meaningful and applicable to a broader population? Furthermore, in an era of value care, do the results justify a potential increase in costs? This article discusses the main points that clinicians consider in their decision-making process and illustrates the arguments with real-life examples.

Non-small-cell lung cancer

Lung cancer is one of the most frequently diagnosed cancers and is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a heterogeneous class of tumours, represents approximately 85% of all new lung cancer diagnoses. Tobacco smoking remains the main risk factor for developing this disease, but radon exposure and air pollution also have a role. Most patients are diagnosed with advanced-stage disease owing to inadequate screening programmes and late onset of clinical symptoms; consequently, patients have a very poor prognosis. Several diagnostic approaches can be used for NSCLC, including X-ray, CT and PET imaging, and histological examination of tumour biopsies. Accurate staging of the cancer is required to determine the optimal management strategy, which includes surgery, radiochemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted approaches with anti-angiogenic monoclonal antibodies or tyrosine kinase inhibitors if tumours harbour oncogene mutations. Several of these driver mutations have been identified (for example, in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)), and therapy continues to advance to tackle acquired resistance problems. Also, palliative care has a central role in patient management and greatly improves quality of life. For an illustrated summary of this Primer, visit: http://go.nature.com/rWYFgg.

Squamous non-small cell lung cancer as a distinct clinical entity

Traditionally, the treatment of lung cancer has been based on histologic type [non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or small cell lung cancer], performance status, and stage of disease. However, more recently, treatment decisions are being made based on molecular and histologic characteristics of the tumor. Specifically, the subclassification of NSCLC as squamous or nonsquamous is important in the context of newer treatments because clinical data have demonstrated differences in the tolerability and activity of these agents. Although progress continues to be made in the treatment of nonsquamous NSCLC, a significant unmet need exists for patients with squamous NSCLC. For both targeted and chemotherapeutic agents, the majority of regulatory approvals and updates to clinical practice guidelines for advanced NSCLC have focused on nonsquamous disease. In addition, because of safety concerns, patients with squamous NSCLC have been excluded from a number of clinical trials of investigational agents, particularly those targeting angiogenesis. This review discusses the importance of histology for treatment selection in NSCLC and summarizes recently completed and ongoing trials of investigational agents in squamous NSCLC. In addition, exciting developments in next-generation sequencing of squamous NSCLC have highlighted differences between squamous and nonsquamous disease and revealed potential new therapeutic targets. Advances in the molecular genetics of squamous NSCLC and implications for therapy will also be reviewed. Although progress in squamous NSCLC has faced limitations, momentum is building toward the identification of more effective treatments for this patient population.

Comparing single-agent with doublet chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer with performance status 2: a meta-analysis

AIM

This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the efficacy and side effects between single-agent and doublet chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer with performance status 2 (PS2).

METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials in online electronic databases and extracted data from eligible studies for meta-analysis. Pooled hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS), pooled risk difference (RD) for 1-year survival, pooled risk ratio (RR) for objective response rate (ORR) and adverse effects were calculated using a fixed-effect model.

RESULTS

Six trials with 386 participants in the single-agent group and 389 participants in the doublet group were included in this review. Compared with single-agent chemotherapy, doublet significantly improved OS (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.61-0.84; P < 0.0001) and significantly increased 1-year survival rate (RD -0.09; 95% CI -0.14 to -0.03; P = 0.004) and ORR (RR 0.4; 95% CI 0.30-0.69; P = 0.0002). Doublet chemotherapy also significantly increased the risk of grade 3/4 neutropenia (RR = 4.97; 95% CI 2.93-8.43; P < 0.00001), thrombocytopenia (RR = 10.29; 95% CI 3.80-27.85; P < 0.00001) and anemia (RR = 2.50; 95% CI 1.27-4.90; P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study implies that carboplatin-containing doublet chemotherapy improved OS, 1-year survival rate and ORR, but increased the risk of grade 3/4 hematotoxicity. Carboplatin-containing doublet may well be superior to non-carboplatin-containing treatment.

Comparison of platinum combination re-challenge therapy and docetaxel monotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer patients previously treated with platinum-based chemoradiotherapy

Platinum-based chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is a standard front-line treatment for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, no clinical trials have compared the efficacy and toxicity of platinum combination and docetaxel as subsequent re-challenge chemotherapies after cancer recurrence following CRT. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of platinum combination chemotherapy versus docetaxel monotherapy in NSCLC patients previously treated with platinum-based CRT.

From September 2002 to December 2009, at three participating institutions, 24 patients with locally advanced NSCLC, who had previously received platinum-based CRT, were treated with platinum combination re-challenge therapy, whereas 61 received docetaxel monotherapy. We reviewed their medical charts to evaluate patient characteristics and data regarding treatment response, survival, and toxicity.

The response rates were 16.7% and 6.6% in the platinum combination chemotherapy and docetaxel monotherapy groups, respectively (p = 0.09), whereas disease control rates were 58.3% and 57.4%, respectively (p = 0.82). Progression-free survival was similar between the two groups (median, 4.2 vs. 2.3 months; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.51–1.29; p = 0.38), as was overall survival (median, 16.5 vs. 13.0 months; HR = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.47–1.41; p = 0.47). The incidence and severity of toxicity was also similar between the two groups. Hematological toxicity, particularly leukopenia and neutropenia, was more frequent in the docetaxel group.

Our results indicated that platinum combination re-challenge was equivalent to docetaxel for relapsed patients previously treated with platinum-based CRT.

KRAS mutation as the biomarker of response to chemotherapy and EGFR-TKIs in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: clues for its potential use in second-line therapy decision making

OBJETIVE

In patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), knowledge of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status is fundamental for selecting the treatment involving EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs). Little information is available regarding the response and progression-free survival (PFS) in platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) versus EGFR-TKIs in the presence or absence of KRAS mutation, particularly in patients without EGFR mutation.

METHODS

From 2007 to 2010, 353 patients with NSCLC were treated with first-line CT, EGFR-TKIs were used in the second or third line of treatment. Tests were performed for EGFR and KRAS mutation and the results of the mutations were obtained 3 to 4 months after the start of the treatment. We analyzed clinical characteristics, mutation profile, response and PFS to CT and EGFR-TKIs, and overall survival. The protocol is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01023828.

RESULTS

Presence of the wild-type (WT) KRAS was independently associated with increased response rate to first-line CT when compared with KRAS mutation (41.4% vs. 14.7%; P=0.001). The EGFR mutation (57.8% vs. 11.7%; P<0.001) and WT-KRAS (39.6% vs. 3.3%; P=0.001) were associated with the EGFR-TKIs response. PFS of patients with WT-EGFR and KRAS mutation treated with EGFR-TKIs was shorter when compared with patients with WT-EGFR and WT-KRAS (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

KRAS mutation status is a good biomarker for response to EGFR-TKIs in patients with NSCLC. KRAS mutational status could impact the decision to give CT or EGFR-TKIs as a second line of treatment to patients with NSCLC, particularly in patients with WT-EGFR.

Erlotinib and bevacizumab versus cisplatin, gemcitabine and bevacizumab in unselected nonsquamous nonsmall cell lung cancer

Erlotinib with bevacizumab showed promising activity in recurrent nonsquamous (NS) nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The INNOVATIONS study was designed to assess in first-line treatment of unselected cisplatin-eligible patients this combination compared to cisplatin, gemcitabine and bevacizumab. Stage IIIB/IV patients with NS-NSCLC were randomised on erlotinib (150 mg daily) and bevacizumab (15 mg·kg(-1) on day 1, every 3 weeks) (EB) until progression, or cisplatin (80 mg·m(-2) on day 1, every 3 weeks) and gemcitabine (1250 mg·m(-2) on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks) up to six cycles and bevacizumab (15 mg·kg(-1) on day 1, every 3 weeks) (PGB) until progression. 224 patients were randomised (EB n=111, PGB n=113). The response rate (12% versus 36%; p<0.0001), progression-free survival (median 3.5 versus 6.9 months; hazard ratio (HR) 1.85, 95% CI 1.39-2.45; p<0.0001) and overall survival (median 12.6 versus 17.8 months; HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.01-1.97; p=0.04) clearly favoured PGB. In patients with epidermal growth factor receptor mutations (n=32), response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival were not superior with EB. Platinum-based combination chemotherapy remains the standard of care in first-line treatment of unselected NS-NSCLC. Molecular targeted approaches strongly mandate appropriate testing and patient selection.

Randomized Phase II Study of Pemetrexed Versus Gefitinib in Previously Treated Patients with Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed versus gefitinib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with chemotherapy.

Materials and Methods

Patients with advanced (stage IIIB or IV) or recurrent NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive either 500 mg/m² of pemetrexed intravenously every 3 weeks or gefitinib 250 mg/day orally. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months.

Results

A total of 95 patients were enrolled (47 for pemetrexed and 48 for gefitinib). Most patients were male (72%) and current/ex-smokers (69%), and 80% had non-squamous cell carcinoma. The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status was determined in 38 patients (40%); one patient per each arm was positive for EGFR mutation. The 6-month PFS rates were 22% and 15% for pemetrexed and gefitinib, respectively (p=0.35). Both arms showed an identical median PFS of 2.0 months and a median overall survival (OS) of 8.5 months. In EGFR wild-type patients, higher response rate (RR) and longer PFS as well as OS were achieved via pemetrexed compared with gefitinib, although there were no significant differences (RR: 39% vs. 9%, p=0.07; median PFS: 6.6 months vs. 3.1 months, p=0.45; median OS: 29.6 months vs. 12.9 months, p=0.62). Toxicities were mild in both treatment arms. Frequently reported toxicities were anemia and fatigue for pemetrexed, and skin rash and anorexia for gefitinib.

Conclusion

Both pemetrexed and gefitinib had similar efficacy with good tolerability as second-line treatment in unselected patients with advanced NSCLC. However, pemetrexed is considered more effective than gefitinib for EGFR wild-type patients.

The multiple cellular functions of the oncoprotein Golgi phosphoprotein 3

The highly conserved Golgi phosphoprotein 3 (GOLPH3) protein, a component of Trans-Golgi Network (TGN), has been defined as a "first-in-class Golgi oncoprotein" and characterized as a Phosphatidylinositol 4-phosphate [PI(4)P] effector at the Golgi. GOLPH3 is commonly amplified in several solid tumors. Furthermore this protein has been associated with poor prognosis in many cancers. Highly conserved from yeast to humans, GOLPH3 provides an essential function in vesicle trafficking and Golgi structure. Recent data have also implicated this oncoprotein in regulation of cytokinesis, modulation of mitochondrial mass and cellular response to DNA damage. A minute dissection of the molecular pathways that require GOLPH3 protein will be helpful to develop new therapeutic cancer strategies.

Genomic profiling toward precision medicine in non-small cell lung cancer: getting beyond EGFR

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. The application of next-generation genomic technologies has offered a more comprehensive look at the mutational landscape across the different subtypes of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A number of recurrent mutations such as TP53, KRAS, and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have been identified in NSCLC. While targeted therapeutic successes have been demonstrated in the therapeutic targeting of EGFR and ALK, the majority of NSCLC tumors do not harbor these genomic events. This review looks at the current treatment paradigms for lung adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas, examining genomic aberrations that dictate therapy selection, as well as novel therapeutic strategies for tumors harboring mutations in KRAS, TP53, and LKB1 which, to date, have been considered “undruggable”. A more thorough understanding of the molecular alterations that govern NSCLC tumorigenesis, aided by next-generation sequencing, will lead to targeted therapeutic options expected to dramatically reduce the high mortality rate observed in lung cancer.

Clinical significance of BIM deletion polymorphism in non-small-cell lung cancer with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation

BACKGROUND

Germline alterations in the proapoptotic protein Bcl-2-like 11 (BIM) can have a crucial role in tumor response to treatment. To determine the clinical utility of detecting BIM deletion polymorphism in non-small-cell lung cancer positive for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation, we examined outcomes of patients with and without BIM alterations.

METHODS

We studied 70 patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer who were treated with an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor between January 2008 and January 2013. BIM deletion was analyzed by polymerase chain reaction in 58 samples of peripheral blood and 24 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded slides of surgical specimens (20 of lung tissue and four of brain tissue); both blood and tissue specimens were available for 12 patients. We retrospectively analyzed clinical characteristics, response rate, toxicity, and outcomes among patients with and without BIM deletion.

RESULTS

BIM deletion was present in 13 of 70 patients (18.6%). There were no significant differences between patients with and without BIM deletion in clinical characteristics, rate of response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, or incidence of adverse events. Patients with BIM deletion had significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) than those without BIM deletion (median, 227 versus 533 days; p < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that BIM deletion was an independent indicator of shorter PFS (hazard ratio, 3.99; 95% confidence interval, 1.864-8.547; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Polymerase chain reaction successfully detected BIM deletion in samples of peripheral blood and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded slides of surgical specimens. BIM deletion was the most important independent prognostic factor in shorter PFS.

Cisplatin versus carboplatin-based regimens for the treatment of patients with metastatic lung cancer. An analysis of Veterans Health Administration data

BACKGROUND

While platinum-based doublet chemotherapy is standard of care for patients presenting with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, the optimal platinum agent (cisplatin versus carboplatin) is unclear. We therefore compared survival and toxicity among persons receiving these agents at Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals.

METHODS

We used the Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry to identify veterans presented between 2001 and 2008 with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, then selected those receiving initial platinum doublet chemotherapy. We compared survival between those receiving cisplatin and carboplatin using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models and propensity score analyses to adjust for imbalances in demographics and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

We identified 4352 eligible persons; 4061 (93%) received carboplatin. Patients treated with cisplatin were younger (median age 61 versus 63, p < 0.01) and had less comorbidities (summary comorbidity score > 2, 7.7% versus 12.8%, p = 0.01) and higher eGFR (87 versus 84 mL/min/1.73 m). Median survival was similar for persons receiving cisplatin and carboplatin (8.1 versus 7.5 months, p = 0.54). In an adjusted survival analyses, the use of cisplatin was not associated with a better survival (hazard ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.84-1.14, p = 0.79). We performed subgroup analysis defined by histology and second agent, the hazard ratio for mortality ranged spanned 1 and none of these approached statistical significance (all p values > 0.20). Cisplatin-treated patients were more likely to have more hospitalization (1.7 versus 1.3, p < 0.01) and outpatient visits (11 versus 9.6, p < 0.01). Cisplatin-treated patient had more subsequent encounters for infection (41.6% versus 34.3%, p < 0.01) and acute kidney injury/dehydration (29.2% versus 15.5%, p < 0.01) CONCLUSIONS:: Patients receiving cisplatin and carboplatin-based doublets did not have significantly different survival, but cisplatin use was associated with an increase morbidity and healthcare use.

The impact of common and rare EGFR mutations in response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors and platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the association between common EGFR mutations (Del EX19/L858R) with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) has been well established. However, this has not been investigated for rare EGFR mutations or their impact on treatment response and outcome to EGFR TKIs (primary objective) and chemotherapy (secondary objective).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In an observational prospective cohort, we analyzed 188 NSCLC patients from Mexico, Colombia and Costa Rica with EGFR mutations. As a first line of treatment, 66.5% received platinum-based chemotherapy. All patients received TKIs in first-line treatment or after progression to chemotherapy. The clinical-pathological characteristics as well as the f of common and rare EGFR mutations associated with treatment response were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of all patients, 79.5% had common and 20.5% had rare EGFR mutations. Lepidic and acinar adenocarcinomas were associated with common EGFR mutations (p=0.010). Patients with common EGFR mutations had higher response rates to EGFR-TKIs than those who had rare EGFR mutations (63.8 vs 32.4%, p<0.001). Women had increased progression-free survival (PFS) to EGFR-TKIs than men (16.4 vs 9.5 months, p=0.02). The median PFS and overall survival (OS) were better in patients with common EGFR mutations (15.5 vs 3.9 months, p<0.001; and 37.3 vs 17.4 months, p<0.001) respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggested that only patients with rare EGFR mutations could receive platinum-based chemotherapy as a first-line treatment, due to their low response rates and short PFS in response to EGFR-TKIs. Consequently, EGFR-TKIs could be reserved as a second- or third-line treatment. In patients with EGFR mutations, women have better PFS to EGFR-TKIs than men, and rare EGFR mutations are more frequent in high grade adenocarcinomas than in low grade tumors.

The survival outcomes and prognosis of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer treated with thoracic three-dimensional radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

The impact of thoracic three-dimensional radiotherapy on the prognosis for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer is unclear. This study is to investigate survival outcomes and prognosis in patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with thoracic three-dimensional radiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy.

METHODS

Ninety three patients with stage IV NSCLC had received at least four cycles of chemotherapy and thoracic three-dimensional radiotherapy of ≥40 Gy on primary tumors. The data from these patients were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 93 patients, the median survival time (MST) was 14.0 months, and the 1, 2, and 3-year survival rates were 54.8%, 20.4%, and 12.9%, respectively. The MST of patients received radiation dose to primary tumor ≥63Gy and <63 Gy for primary tumor were 15.0 and 8.0 months, respectively (P = 0.001). Patients had metastasis to a single site and lower tumor volume (<170 cm(3)) also produced longer overall survival time (P = 0.002, P = 0.020, respectively). For patients with metastasis at a single site, thoracic radiation dose ≥63 Gy remained a prognostic factor for better overall survival (P = 0.030); patients with metastases at multiple sites, radiation dose ≥63 Gy had a trend to improve overall survival (P = 0.062). A multivariate analysis showed that radiation dose ≥63 Gy (P = 0.017) and metastasis to a single site (P = 0.038) are associated with better overall survival, and the volume of primary tumor was marginally correlated with OS (P = 0.054).

CONCLUSIONS

In combination with systemic chemotherapy, radiation dose ≥63 Gy on primary tumor and metastasis to a single site are significant factors for better OS, aggressive thoracic radiotherapy may have an important role in improving OS.

Cost-utility analysis of maintenance therapy with gemcitabine or erlotinib vs observation with predefined second-line treatment after cisplatin-gemcitabine induction chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC: IFCT-GFPC 0502-Eco phase III study

Background

The IFCT-GFPC 0502 phase III study reported prolongation of progression-free survival with gemcitabine or erlotinib maintenance vs. observation after cisplatin–gemcitabine induction chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This analysis was undertaken to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of these strategies for the global population and pre-specified subgroups.

Methods

A cost-utility analysis evaluated the ICER of gemcitabine or erlotinib maintenance therapy vs. observation, from randomization until the end of follow-up. Direct medical costs (including drugs, hospitalization, follow-up examinations, second-line treatments and palliative care) were prospectively collected per patient during the trial, until death, from the primary health-insurance provider’s perspective. Utility data were extracted from literature. Sensitivity analyses were conducted.

Results

The ICERs for gemcitabine or erlotinib maintenance therapy were respectively 76,625 and 184,733 euros per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Gemcitabine continuation maintenance therapy had a favourable ICER in patients with PS = 0 (52,213 €/QALY), in responders to induction chemotherapy (64,296 €/QALY), regardless of histology (adenocarcinoma, 62,292 €/QALY, non adenocarcinoma, 83,291 €/QALY). Erlotinib maintenance showed a favourable ICER in patients with PS = 0 (94,908 €/QALY), in patients with adenocarcinoma (97,160 €/QALY) and in patient with objective response to induction (101,186 €/QALY), but it is not cost-effective in patients with PS =1, in patients with non-adenocarcinoma or with stable disease after induction chemotherapy.

Conclusion

Gemcitabine- or erlotinib-maintenance therapy had ICERs that varied as a function of histology, PS and response to first-line chemotherapy.

Cytochrome P450 1B1 (CYP1B1) polymorphisms are associated with clinical outcome of docetaxel in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients

PURPOSE

Cytochrome P450 1B1 (CYP1B1) is involved in the metabolism of anticancer agents; its overexpression was associated with resistance to docetaxel, a commonly used drug for second-line treatment of NSCLC. Several functional single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have been associated with CYP1B1 expression and activity. The objective of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the correlation of CYP1B1 SNPs with the outcome of NSCLC patients treated with docetaxel in second or third line.

METHODS

Associations between CYP1B1 4326C>G and 4390A>G polymorphisms with response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Pearson χ(2) test, Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test; a multivariate analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazards modeling.

RESULTS

A total of 65 advanced NSCLC patients were enrolled into the analysis. Median age was 66 years (range 46-81). Forty-nine patients were male; only five were never smokers. Performance status (PS) was 0 in 25 patients, 1 in 28 and 2 in 12. Histology was adenocarcinoma in 28 patients, squamous carcinoma in 22, other NSCLC in the remaining 15. At univariate analysis, stage and CYP1B1 4326C>G SNPs are associated with PFS, while PS and CYP1B1 4326C>G SNPs correlated with OS. In particular, patients with CYP1B1 4326-GG genotype had shorter PFS and OS than patients with other genotypes (PFS 1.80 vs. 2.70 months, p = 0.12; OS 3.63 vs. 9.83 months, p = 0.039). CYP1B1 4326C>G SNPs were also associated with response rate. Multivariate analysis confirmed the independent prognostic/predictive role of CYP1B1 4326C>G SNPs on OS (p = 0.042) with only a trend for PFS (p = 0.083).

CONCLUSIONS

CYP1B1 4326C>G polymorphism emerged as possible prognostic/predictive marker of activity and efficacy of docetaxel in NSCLC patients.

Clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements in oncology--an assessment of their methodological quality

BACKGROUND

Consensus statements and clinical practice guidelines are widely available for enhancing the care of cancer patients. Despite subtle differences in their definition and purpose, these terms are often used interchangeably. We systematically assessed the methodological quality of consensus statements and clinical practice guidelines published in three commonly read, geographically diverse, cancer-specific journals. Methods Consensus statements and clinical practice guidelines published between January 2005 and September 2013 in Current Oncology, European Journal of Cancer and Journal of Clinical Oncology were evaluated. Each publication was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) rigour of development and editorial independence domains. For assessment of transparency of document development, 7 additional items were taken from the Institute of Medicine's standards for practice guidelines and the Journal of Clinical Oncology guidelines for authors of guidance documents.

METHODS

Consensus statements and clinical practice guidelines published between January 2005 and September 2013 in Current Oncology, European Journal of Cancer and Journal of Clinical Oncology were evaluated. Each publication was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) rigour of development and editorial independence domains. For assessment of transparency of document development, 7 additional items were taken from the Institute of Medicine's standards for practice guidelines and the Journal of Clinical Oncology guidelines for authors of guidance documents.

FINDINGS

Thirty-four consensus statements and 67 clinical practice guidelines were evaluated. The rigour of development score for consensus statements over the three journals was 32% lower than that of clinical practice guidelines. The editorial independence score was 15% lower for consensus statements than clinical practice guidelines. One journal scored consistently lower than the others over both domains. No journals adhered to all the items related to the transparency of document development. One journal's consensus statements endorsed a product made by the sponsoring pharmaceutical company in 64% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Guidance documents are an essential part of oncology care and should be subjected to a rigorous and validated development process. Consensus statements had lower methodological quality than clinical practice guidelines using AGREE II. At a minimum, journals should ensure that that all consensus statements and clinical practice guidelines adhere to AGREE II criteria. Journals should consider explicitly requiring guidelines to declare pharmaceutical company sponsorship and to identify the sponsor's product to enhance transparency.

Referral patterns in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: impact on delivery of treatment and survival in a contemporary population based cohort

INTRODUCTION

Chemotherapy improves overall survival (OS) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), yet low rates of chemotherapy utilization have been observed. We sought to characterize the clinical effectiveness of chemotherapy in the general population by evaluating referral patterns, predictors of chemotherapy receipt and outcomes.

METHODS

All referred cases of stage IIIB/IV NSCLC in British Columbia from January 1 to December 31, 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics and treatments were extracted. OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox Proportional Hazards modeling was used to control for confounding variables. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess factors that predicted for chemotherapy treatment.

RESULTS

1373 patients were identified. Median age 70 years, 53% male, 37% ECOG ≥ 3.

HISTOLOGY

34% non-squamous, 21% squamous and 46% NOS. 748 (54%) patients were assessed by medical oncology and 417 (30%) received chemotherapy. Predictors of chemotherapy treatment were younger age, ECOG 0-2, living in a rural area and not receiving radiotherapy. There was an improvement in OS in patients who received chemotherapy at 13.1 months versus best supportive care 5.4 months (p<0.0001). This remained statistically significant when controlling for ECOG, sex, age, histology (HR 0.68, CI 0.59-0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based setting, 37% of patients had an ECOG ≥ 3 at the time of referral, 54% were assessed by a medical oncologist and only 30% received chemotherapy. This is despite the awareness that chemotherapy significantly improves survival. Strategies to optimize appropriate referral such that patients do not miss out on life-prolonging therapy should be evaluated.

Mutational profiling of bone metastases from lung adenocarcinoma: results of a prospective study (POUMOS-TEC)

Targeted therapies have improved patient survival in metastatic lung adenocarcinoma. Molecular diagnosis is a key element to identify oncogenic drivers predicting the efficacy of these agents. In stage IV patients, histopathological diagnosis is often performed on bone metastases biopsy, but routine procedure of decalcification may alter DNA quality for subsequent molecular tests. We set up a procedure to perform molecular analyses on bone metastasis and describe the results of mutational profiling. POUMOS-TEC is a prospective study conducted in stage IV lung adenocarcinomas. Bone metastasis specimens from surgery and CT-scan guided biopsies were sent fresh for immediate formalin-fixation. Decalcification was performed, only when necessary, using EDTA. Controls were processed with acid decalcification. DNA extraction was performed after laser microdissection. Mutational profiling of oncogenic drivers was conducted as recommended by the French National Cancer Institute. Diagnosis efficiency of the computed tomography (CT)-scan guided biopsy process was assessed. Among 177 collected bone metastases specimens, 49 came from lung adenocarcinomas. Specimens processed with no decalcification or EDTA (n=45) provided high-quality DNA. Molecular profiling was performed in 44/45 (98%) of cases. The results of the whole panel of oncogenic drivers (EGFR, KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA, HER2 and ALK) were obtained in 41/45 (91%) of cases. A mutation was observed in 50% of cases including 32% of KRAS and 14% of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. CT-scan biopsy efficiency rate was 96%. We demonstrated the feasibility to routinely conduct mutational profiling on bone metastases biopsies. We observed a higher rate of EGFR mutations (+42%) in comparison with the average rate of all stage IV lung adenocarcinomas. This procedure is a new step toward the goal of personalized medicine to treat lung cancers and other osteophilic tumors.

Comparison of survival and hospitalization rates between Medicare patients with advanced NSCLC treated with bevacizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel and carboplatin-paclitaxel: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The use of bevacizumab in advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is controversial among elderly patients. This study aimed to compare overall survival for Medicare patients diagnosed with NSCLC and treated with either first-line bevacizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (BCP) or carboplatin-paclitaxel (CP).

METHODS

Patients ≥ 65 years old, first diagnosed with non-squamous NSCLC stage IIIB/IV between 2006 and 2009, and treated with either first-line BCP or CP, were selected from the SEER-Medicare database that links cancer registry and US Medicare claims data. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to evaluate survival. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare the effect of BCP versus CP on the hazard of death. Age-stratified analyses were conducted for patients aged 65-74 and ≥ 75 years.

RESULTS

Of 1706 patients in the study sample, 592 (34.7%) received BCP and 1114 (65.3%) received CP; 692 (40.6%) were ≥ 75 years. Adjusted median survival time in the BCP versus CP cohorts was 10.5 versus 8.5 months (p = 0.008). The difference in median survival favoring the BCP cohort was statistically significant for both patients aged ≥ 75 years (2.8 months, p = 0.019), and patients aged 65-74 years (1.5 months, p = 0.018). The adjusted hazard of death did not differ between the cohorts (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.86-1.06); however, during the first year of follow-up, when most deaths (>60%) occurred, the hazard of death was 18% lower for the BCP cohort (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.71-0.94). BCP patients also had 18% fewer hospital admissions than CP patients (adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.82, 95% CI: 0.72-0.94) and 23% fewer inpatient days (IRR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.65-0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective analysis of Medicare patients in the SEER database, first-line therapy with BCP was associated with longer survival and fewer hospitalizations than CP.

PARAMOUNT: Descriptive subgroup analyses of final overall survival for the phase III study of maintenance pemetrexed versus placebo following induction treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

The PARAMOUNT phase III trial demonstrated that pemetrexed continuation maintenance significantly reduced the risk of disease progression (hazard ratio = 0.62) and death (hazard ratio = 0.78) versus placebo in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. To further understand the survival data, descriptive subgroup analyses were undertaken.

METHODS

Nine hundred thirty-nine patients received induction therapy (four 21-day cycles pemetrexed 500 mg/m and cisplatin 75 mg/m), after which 539 nonprogressing patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) of 0/1 were randomized (2:1) to maintenance pemetrexed (500 mg/m) cycles or placebo until disease progression.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of patients surviving for longer periods were comparable to patients surviving shorter periods, suggesting overall survival (OS) benefit for all subgroups of patients on maintenance therapy. An examination of type and severity of induction adverse events also found no association with survival duration. Response to induction (tumor response versus stable disease) was not determinate of pemetrexed maintenance OS outcome as assessed by waterfall plot and scattergrams and by the distribution of patients among various OS intervals. The length of the interval before beginning maintenance therapy (<7 days versus ≥7/≤30 days) also did not impact the survival results. PS, a known prognostic factor, was the only baseline characteristic associated with improved OS; however, both PS 0 and PS 1 patients exhibited a survival benefit from pemetrexed maintenance.

CONCLUSIONS

In PARAMOUNT, the OS benefit was seen across all subgroups. Other than PS, no baseline or clinical parameter clearly identified a subgroup more likely to benefit. Maintenance treatment decisions should be made on an individual basis.

Treatment algorithm in 2014 for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: therapy selection by tumour histology and molecular biology

The availability of antineoplastic monoclonal antibodies, small molecules and newer cytotoxics such as pemetrexed, the EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib as well as the anti-angiogenic bevacizumab and the ALK-inhibitor crizotinib has recently changes the treatment algorithm of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Decision making in 2014 is characterized by customizing therapy, by selecting a specific therapeutic regimen based on the histotype and the genotype of the tumour. This refers to first-line induction therapy and maintenance therapy as well, but also to subsequent lines of therapy since anti-neoplastic drugs and regimens used upfront clinically influence the selection of agents/regimes considered for second-/third-line treatment. Consequently, therapy customization through tumour histology and molecular markers has significantly influenced the work of pathologists around the globe and the process of obtaining an extended therapeutically relevant tumour diagnosis. Not only histological sub-typing became standard but molecular information is also considered of increasing importance for treatment selection. Routine molecular testing in certified laboratories must be established, and the diagnostic process should ideally be performed under the guidance of evidence based recommendation. The process of investigating and implementing medical targeting in lung cancer therefore, requires advanced diagnostic techniques and expertise and because of its large dimension is costly and influenced by the limitation of financial and clinical resources.

PVM/MA-shelled selol nanocapsules promote cell cycle arrest in A549 lung adenocarcinoma cells

BACKGROUND

Selol is an oily mixture of selenitetriacylglycerides that was obtained as a semi-synthetic compound containing selenite. Selol is effective against cancerous cells and less toxic to normal cells compared with inorganic forms of selenite. However, Selol's hydrophobicity hinders its administration in vivo. Therefore, the present study aimed to produce a formulation of Selol nanocapsules (SPN) and to test its effectiveness against pulmonary adenocarcinoma cells (A549).

RESULTS

Nanocapsules were produced through an interfacial nanoprecipitation method. The polymer shell was composed of poly(methyl vinyl ether-co-maleic anhydride) (PVM/MA) copolymer. The obtained nanocapsules were monodisperse and stable. Both free Selol (S) and SPN reduced the viability of A549 cells, whereas S induced a greater reduction in non-tumor cell viability than SPN. The suppressor effect of SPN was primarily associated to the G2/M arrest of the cell cycle, as was corroborated by the down-regulations of the CCNB1 and CDC25C genes. Apoptosis and necrosis were induced by Selol in a discrete percentage of A549 cells. SPN also increased the production of reactive oxygen species, leading to oxidative cellular damage and to the overexpression of the GPX1, CYP1A1, BAX and BCL2 genes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents a stable formulation of PVM/MA-shelled Selol nanocapsules and provides the first demonstration that Selol promotes G2/M arrest in cancerous cells.

Biomarkers That Currently Affect Clinical Practice in Lung Cancer: EGFR, ALK, MET, ROS-1, and KRAS

Lung cancer remains the most lethal malignancy in the world. Despite improvements in surgical treatment, systemic therapy, and radiotherapy, the 5-year survival rate for all patients diagnosed with lung cancer remains between 15 and 20%. Newer therapeutic strategies rely on specific molecular alterations, or biomarkers, that provide opportunities for a personalized approach to specific patient populations. Classification of lung cancer is becoming increasingly focused on these biomarkers, which renders the term "non-small cell lung" cancer less clinically useful. Non-small cell lung cancer is now recognized as a complex malignancy and its molecular and genomic diversity allows for patient-centered treatment options. Here, we review advances in targeted treatment of lung adenocarcinoma with respect to five clinically relevant biomarkers - EGFR, ALK, MET, ROS-1, and KRAS.

Randomized open-label non-comparative multicenter phase II trial of sequential erlotinib and docetaxel versus docetaxel alone in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer after failure of first-line chemotherapy: GFPC 10.02 study

BACKGROUND

Concomitant administration of erlotinib with standard chemotherapy does not appear to improve survival among patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but preliminary studies suggest that sequential administration might be effective.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of second-line sequential administration of erlotinib and docetaxel in advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

In an open-label phase II trial, patients with advanced NSCLC, EGFR wild-type or unknown, PS 0-2, in whom initial cisplatin-based chemotherapy had failed were randomized to sequential erlotinib 150 mg/d (day 2-16)+docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) d1) (arm ED) or docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) d1) alone (arm D) (21-day cycle). The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival rate at 15 weeks (PFS 15). Secondary endpoints included PFS, overall survival (OS), the overall response rate (ORR) and tolerability. Based on a Simon optimal two-stage design, the ED strategy was rejected if the primary endpoint was below 33/66 patients at the end of the two Simon stages.

RESULTS

147 patients were randomized (median age: 60±8 years, PS 0/1/2: 44/83/20 patients; males: 78%). The ED strategy was rejected, with only 18 of 73 patients achieving PFS15 in arm ED at the end of stage 2 and 17 of 74 patients in arm D. In arms ED and D, respectively, median PFS was 2.2 and 2.5 months and median OS was 6.5 and 8.3 months.

CONCLUSION

Sequential erlotinib and docetaxel was not more effective than docetaxel alone as second-line treatment for advanced NSCLC with wild-type or unknown EGFR status.

Efficacy and safety of maintenance pemetrexed in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer following pemetrexed plus cisplatin induction treatment: A cross-trial comparison of two phase III trials

OBJECTIVES

Two phase III trials of advanced NSCLC patients were compared to examine relative efficacy and safety of differing treatment regimens. The JMDB trial investigated first-line pemetrexed-cisplatin (pemetrexed 500mg/m(2) plus cisplatin 75mg/m(2) every 21 days; maximum: 6 cycles). The PARAMOUNT phase III trial compared maintenance pemetrexed versus placebo after patients with nonsquamous NSCLC completed 4 cycles of first-line pemetrexed-cisplatin without disease progression.

METHODS

Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), analyzed by Kaplan-Meier and Cox methods, and toxicity rates were compared between the PARAMOUNT arms and a selected homogeneous population from JMDB: 346 patients with disease and prior treatment characteristics matching the PARAMOUNT population.

RESULTS

Outcomes for the PARAMOUNT placebo arm were similar to the JMDB homogeneous group (median PFS: 5.6 versus 6.2 months, p=0.117, HR=1.16; median OS: 14.0 versus 14.2 months, p=0.979, HR=1.00). The PARAMOUNT maintenance pemetrexed group had statistically superior efficacy compared with the JMDB homogeneous group (median PFS: 7.5 versus 6.2 months, p<0.00001, HR=0.66; median OS: 16.9 versus 14.2 months, p=0.003, HR=0.75). Patients who received pemetrexed maintenance (median 4 cycles, range 1-44) following 4 cycles of pemetrexed-cisplatin exhibited a higher incidence of drug-related serious adverse events compared with JMDB patients (median 6 cycles of pemetrexed-cisplatin) (10.6% versus 2.9%); grade 3/4 fatigue and renal toxicity were also higher in the pemetrexed arm of PARAMOUNT.

CONCLUSIONS

The across-trial comparison of a relevant JMDB study population with the two arms of the PARAMOUNT study supported the efficacy of the pemetrexed continuation maintenance strategy and suggested the results are not influenced by limiting the pemetrexed-cisplatin induction treatment to four cycles. Although longer exposure to pemetrexed-cisplatin or maintenance pemetrexed increased some toxicities, the overall incidence remained low, underscoring the relative safety of these treatment regimens.

Radiation dose and survival of patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer undergoing concurrent chemotherapy and thoracic three-dimensional radiotherapy: reanalysis of the findings of a single-center prospective study

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate the radiation dose and response in terms of local-regional progression-free survival (LRPFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing concurrent chemotherapy and thoracic three-dimensional radiotherapy.

METHODS

In all, we enrolled 201 patients with stage IV NSCLC in this study and analyzed OS in 159 patients and LRPFS in 120.

RESULTS

The 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 46.2%, 19.5%, 11.7%, and 5.8%, respectively, the median survival time being 12 months. The median survival times in differential treatment response of primary tumors were 19 of complete response, 13 of partial response, 8 of stable disease, and 6 months of progressive disease, respectively (P = 0.000). The 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year LRPFS rates of patients undergoing four to five cycles with doses ≥63 Gy and <63 Gy were 77.4% and 32.6%, 36.2% and 21.7%, 27.2% and 0, and 15.9% and 0, respectively (P = 0.002). According to multivariate analyses, four to five cycles of chemotherapy, gross tumor volume <175.00 cm3 and post-treatment Karnofsky Performance Status score stable or increased by at least 10 units were independent prognostic factors for better OS (P = 0.035, P = 0.008, and P = 0.000, respectively). Radiation dose to the primary tumor ≥63 Gy resulted in better OS (P = 0.057) and LRPFS (P = 0.051), both findings being of borderline significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of IV NSCLC with joint administration of four to five cycles of chemotherapy and three-dimensional radiotherapy may prolong survival, particularly in patients receiving ≥63 Gy radiotherapy, with gross tumor volume <175.00 cm3 and post-treatment Karnofsky Performance Status score not lower than pretreatment values.

Prospective phase II study of cisplatin plus pemetrexed with maintenance of pemetrexed for advanced non-squamous cell non-small cell lung cancer in Japan

BACKGROUND

A previous study showed a survival benefit with maintenance therapy with pemetrexed in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, it remains unclear whether continuation maintenance therapy with pemetrexed is beneficial in Japanese patients. Here, we present our phase II study that assessed the efficacy and safety of cisplatin plus pemetrexed as induction chemotherapy, followed by maintenance therapy with pemetrexed in advanced NSCLC patients in Japan.

METHODS

Chemotherapy-naïve patients received 500 mg/m(2) pemetrexed and 75 mg/m(2) cisplatin on day one every three weeks for four cycles. In patients who responded to therapy or achieved stable disease, pemetrexed was continued until disease progression. The primary endpoint of this study was the progression-free survival rate at six months (PFS-6).

RESULTS

Of the 35 patients initially enrolled in the study, 18 (51%) received maintenance chemotherapy with pemetrexed. The median PFS was 6.7 months, and the PFS-6 was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI], 42-76%). Median overall survival (OS) was 15.5 months (95% CI, 8.3-22.7 months). The median PFS and OS in patients who received maintenance chemotherapy with pemetrexed were 9.5 months and 25.3 months, respectively. The most frequently noted severe toxicity during induction chemotherapy was neutropenia, which occurred in seven patients. Two patients discontinued maintenance therapy owing to prolonged grade 2 edema in one patient and grade 3 neutropenia in another.

CONCLUSION

Continuation maintenance chemotherapy with pemetrexed is associated with a survival benefit in patients who have completed induction chemotherapy for non-squamous NSCLC.

Prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer patients with bone oligometastases treated concurrently with thoracic three-dimensional radiotherapy and chemotherapy

Background

To evaluate the efficacy of three-dimensional radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with bone metastases.

Methods

Clinical data for 95 NSCLC patients with bone metastases were collected and prognostic factors were analyzed. All patients received radiation to their thoracic primary tumor and ≥2 cycles of chemotherapy.

Results

Of these 95 patients, 47 patients had only bone metastases and 48 had both bone metastases and other organ metastases. Univariate analysis showed that factors that statistically significantly contributed to patients having longer overall survival (OS) included receiving a radiation dose to the primary tumor ≥63 Gy, responding to treatment and receiving ≥4 cycles of chemotherapy (p = 0.001, p = 0.037 and p = 0.009, respectively). A radiation dose to the primary tumor ≥63 Gy remained significant for patients with bone metastases only as well as those with bone and other organ metastases when they were analyzed separately (p = 0.045 and p = 0.012, respectively). For patients with bone metastases only, those with T1-2 tumors had longer OS than those with T3-4 (p = 0.048); and patients who received ≥4 cycles chemotherapy compared with those who received <4 cycles had similar OS (p = 0.385). On multivariate analysis, only a radiation dose ≥63 Gy (p = 0.028) and having only bone metastases (p = 0.006) were independent prognostic factors for better OS.

Conclusions

A radiation dose to the primary tumor ≥63 Gy and having only bone metastases were associated with better OS in NSCLC patients with bone metastases. For patients with bone metastases only, besides radiation dose, T status was also correlated with OS, whereas the number of chemotherapy cycles was not. Therefore, aggressive thoracic radiation may play an important role in improving OS.

Long-term and low-grade safety results of a phase III study (PARAMOUNT): maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care immediately after induction treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

In the PARAMOUNT ("A Phase 3, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Maintenance Pemetrexed plus Best Supportive Care vs. Best Supportive Care Immediately Following Induction Treatment with Pemetrexed Plus Cisplatin for Advanced Non-Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer") trial, patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NS-NSCLC) benefited from pemetrexed maintenance therapy after induction therapy with pemetrexed and cisplatin by extending survival, delaying disease progression, and maintaining quality of life (QoL). However, low-grade 1 or 2 toxicities during long-term maintenance treatment may become burdensome and impact QoL.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients in this double-blind study (n = 539), who had completed 4 induction cycles (pemetrexed with cisplatin) without progressive disease (PD) and had an ECOG performance status of 0/1, were randomized 2:1 to pemetrexed maintenance (500 mg/m(2), day 1) plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC until PD. Adverse events (by maximum Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] grade) and QoL (EuroQol 5-dimensional [EQ-5D] scale) were assessed.

RESULTS

A median of 4 maintenance cycles was administered (range, pemetrexed 1-44; mean ± SD 7.9 ± 8.3; placebo 1-38; mean ± SD 5.0 ± 5.2), with 28% of pemetrexed and 12% of placebo patients receiving ≥ 10 maintenance cycles. The pemetrexed dose intensity was 94%. More patients receiving pemetrexed (12%) than placebo discontinued because of possible drug-related CTCAEs (4%; P = .005). Overall, pemetrexed was associated with significantly more (P < .05) low-grade events (grade 1/2 nausea, grade 2 anemia, edema, and neutropenia) than placebo. Overall, the incidence of low-grade fatigue, anemia, and neutropenia decreased with long-term pemetrexed exposure; however, renal events increased across treatment arms. EQ-5D analyses demonstrated no treatment-by-time interaction or overall treatment differences between the 2 arms.

CONCLUSION

PARAMOUNT demonstrated a low incidence of low-grade toxicities with long-term pemetrexed exposure without compromising QoL in patients with NS-NSCLC.

First-line pemetrexed plus cisplatin followed by gefitinib maintenance therapy versus gefitinib monotherapy in East Asian patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer: a randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

In the Iressa Pan-ASia Study (IPASS), gefitinib claimed improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus carboplatin-paclitaxel in clinically selected lung cancer patients. The primary objective of this study was to assess the PFS of pemetrexed-cisplatin (PC) followed by gefitinib maintenance versus gefitinib monotherapy in an IPASS-like population.

METHODS

In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, eligible patients were ⩾18 years, chemonaïve, East Asian, light ex-smokers/never-smokers with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1 and unknown epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status who enrolled at 12 sites in Asia. Patients randomly received (1:1) pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2)) plus cisplatin (75mg/m(2)) for six 21-day cycles, followed by gefitinib maintenance or gefitinib monotherapy (250 mg/day). Patient tissue was retrospectively analysed for EGFR mutations. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01017874.

FINDINGS

Between 23rd November 2009 and 27th April 2012, 253 patients entered, and 236 patients were randomly assigned to and treated with PC therapy (N=114) and gefitinib monotherapy (N=118). Between-arm baseline characteristics were balanced. PFS was not significantly different between treatment arms (p=0.217). The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-1.13). The HR should be cautiously interpreted as it was not constant. EGFR mutation status was determined for 74 tissue samples; 50 (67.6%) had mutations. In a pre-specified subgroup analysis, only the treatment-by-EGFR mutation interaction was significant (p=0.008) for PFS. For the entire treatment period, a higher proportion of patients in the PC/gefitinib arm versus gefitinib experienced possibly drug-related grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events (39 of 114 [34%] versus 19 of 118 [16%]; p=0.002).

INTERPRETATION

In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, PFS was not significantly different. In the biomarker-assessable population, front-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy was not efficacious in patients with wild-type EGFR. Identification of EGFR mutation status is key in the management of advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company.

Advanced non-small cell lung cancer management in patients progressing after first-line treatment: results of the cross-sectional phase of the Italian LIFE observational study

PURPOSE

LIFE (non-small cell Lung cancer management In patients progressing after First-linE of treatment in the metastatic setting) is a multicentre Italian observational study, including a cross-sectional and a longitudinal phase, with the aim of describing the therapeutic approach in clinical practice for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, progressing after first-line treatment.

METHODS

In this paper, the cross-sectional phase is outlined, with the primary endpoint of describing the proportion of patients receiving second-line treatment among those progressed during or after first-line treatment according to clinical practice.

RESULTS

From July 2011 to January 2012, 603 patients were enrolled and 541 (90 %) were evaluable. A total of 464 (86 %) patients received a second-line therapy outside clinical trials. Chemotherapy and targeted therapies were administered to 65 and 34 % of patients, respectively (1 % both). No tissue collection was required within the observational trial, and biomarkers analysis was performed at diagnosis or later in 314 patients (58 %). In details, activating epidermal growth factor receptor mutations were detected in 21 % of 311 evaluable patients, Kirsten rat sarcoma 2 viral oncogene homolog mutation in 22 % of the 77 evaluable patients and anaplastic lymphoma kinase translocations analysis was performed in 74 patients and resulted positive in 23 % of cases. These high proportions were probably due to enriched patient population tested.

CONCLUSIONS

These results showed a pattern of care for NSCLC second-line therapy which reflects international guidelines recommendations and current expected clinical practice. Interestingly, biomarkers analyses were performed in a higher percentage than expected.

Critical appraisal of pemetrexed in the treatment of NSCLC and metastatic pulmonary nodules

Pemetrexed, a new multitarget antifolate antineoplastic agent, has significantly improved the overall survival in nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer patients. Presently, pemetrexed is recommended for first line treatment in combination with platinum derivatives, for second line treatment as a single agent and, more recently, as maintenance treatment after first line chemotherapy. In this article we critically appraise the status of pemetrexed including pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, toxicity, and the cost effectiveness of pemetrexed, as well as the predictive biomarkers for pemetrexed based chemotherapy.

Pemetrexed in non-small-cell lung cancer

SUMMARY 

Pemetrexed, a multitargeted antifolate agent, is currently used in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. Strong evidence has shown a treatment-by-histology interaction, with pemetrexed acting significantly better in the nonsquamous cell subtype. Therefore, all pemetrexed indications are restricted to this histology. Associated initially with somewhat high toxicity, the use of vitamin supplementation and corticoid premedication turned pemetrexed into one of the most convenient chemotherapy agents. At present pemetrexed is recommended as one of the preferred platinum partners in first line and as a single agent in the second-line setting for nonsquamous histology. The particular efficacy/toxicity profile has confirmed pemetrexed as the only chemotherapy agent approved for both continuation and switch maintenance therapy.