Failure of the perioperative PCV neoadjuvant polychemotherapy in resectable bronchogenic non-small cell carcinoma. Results from a randomized phase II trial

Pathological response in resectable non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer receiving neoadjuvant therapy are needed to provide earlier treatment outcome indicators and accelerate drug approval. This study's main objectives were to investigate the association among pathological complete response, major pathological response, event-free survival and overall survival and to determine whether treatment effects on pathological complete response and event-free survival correlate with treatment effects on overall survival.

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic literature review was conducted to identify neoadjuvant studies in resectable non-small cell lung cancer. Analysis at the patient level using frequentist and Bayesian random effects (hazard ratio [HR] for overall survival or event-free survival by pathological complete response or major pathological response status, yes vs no) and at the trial level using weighted least squares regressions (hazard ratio for overall survival or event-free survival vs pathological complete response, by treatment arm) were performed.

RESULTS

In both meta-analyses, pathological complete response yielded favorable overall survival compared with no pathological complete response (frequentist, 20 studies and 6530 patients: HR = 0.49, 95% confidence interval = 0.42 to 0.57; Bayesian, 19 studies and 5988 patients: HR = 0.48, 95% probability interval = 0.43 to 0.55) and similarly for major pathological response (frequentist, 12 studies and 1193 patients: HR = 0.36, 95% confidence interval = 0.29 to 0.44; Bayesian, 11 studies and 1018 patients: HR = 0.33, 95% probability interval = 0.26 to 0.42). Across subgroups, estimates consistently showed better overall survival or event-free survival in pathological complete response or major pathological response compared with no pathological complete response or no major pathological response. Trial-level analyses showed a moderate to strong correlation between event-free survival and overall survival hazard ratios (R2 = 0.7159) but did not show a correlation between treatment effects on pathological complete response and overall survival or event-free survival.

CONCLUSION

There was a strong and consistent association between pathological response and survival and a moderate to strong correlation between event-free survival and overall survival following neoadjuvant therapy for patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer.

Effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the survival outcomes of patients with resectable non-small-cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

To determine the effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) versus primary surgery on survival outcomes for resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using an approach based on a meta-analysis.

METHODS

The PubMed, EmBase, Cochrane library, and CNKI databases were systematically browsed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which met a set of predetermined inclusion criteria throughout January 2020. Hazard ratios (HRs) were applied for the pooled overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) values, and the pooled survival rates at 1-year and 3-year were used as the relative risk (RR). All the pooled effect estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

Nineteen RCTs contained a total of 4372 NSCLC at I-III stages was selected for final meta-analysis. We noted NACT was significantly associated with an improvement in OS (HR: 0.87; 95%CI: 0.81-0.94; P < 0.001) and PFS (HR: 0.86; 95%CI: 0.78-0.96; P = 0.005). Moreover, the survival rate at 1-year (RR: 1.07; 95%CI: 1.02-1.12; P = 0.007) and 3-year (RR: 1.16; 95%CI: 1.06-1.27; P = 0.001) in the NACT group was significantly higher than the survival rate for the primary surgery group. Finally, the treatment effects of NACT versus primary surgery on survival outcomes might be different when stratified by the mean age of patients and the tumor stages.

CONCLUSIONS

NACT could improve survival outcomes for patients with resectable NSCLC, suggesting its suitable future applicability for clinical practice. However, large-scale RCT should be conducted to assess the chemotherapy regimen on the prognosis of resectable NSCLC.

Bayesian network meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer

Objective:

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy has increased the survival benefit of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The effects of different neoadjuvant therapies are still controversial. We carried out the study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant therapy.

Methods:

We performed a search of electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing neoadjuvant treatment. After literature screening and data extraction, efficacy, and safety were analyzed by the Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).

Results:

A total of 19 RCTs were included, covering 3276 patients and six kinds of neoadjuvant therapies, including immunotherapy, targeted therapy, chemotherapy drugs and radiotherapy. Erlotinib, the first-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine inhibitors (EGFR TKIs), neoadjuvant targeted therapy is best for improving overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), which is superior to other neoadjuvant therapy, such as neoadjuvant chemotherapy with platinum drugs [hazard ratio (HR) 0.39, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) 0.16–0.96], neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14–0.96) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy with non-platinum drugs (HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.07–0.90). OS of all neoadjuvant therapies is superior to surgery alone, but only neoadjuvant chemotherapy with platinum drugs showed a significant advantage (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59–0.93). Besides, for the stage IIIA N2 NSCLC patients, no significant difference was found between neoadjuvant therapies.

Conclusions:

Targeted neoadjuvant therapy is the best treatment for prolonging PFS. The neoadjuvant chemotherapy with platinum drugs was associated with the better OS benefits for patients with NSCLC, compared with surgery alone. There is no significant difference in the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy for the stage IIIA N2 NSCLC.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus upfront surgery in non-metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The favorable effect of postoperative chemotherapy on long-term survival has been well acknowledged in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), while the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) remains obscure. This meta-analysis enrolling high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed at comparing NAC followed by surgery with upfront surgery (US) in efficacy and safety among non-metastatic NSCLC patients.

Materials and Methods

Relevant literatures were searched systematically from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. We also screened references of relevant publications and conference proceedings. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), disease free survival (DFS), 3-year and 5-year survival rates, mortality, and recurrence. Secondary outcomes included tumor-free (R0) resection rates, response rate, and postoperative complications. Subgroup analysis according to ethnicity was further conducted.

Results

A total of 11 eligible RCTs comparing NAC (n = 1624) with US (n = 1639) and published from 1998 to 2013 were included. Compared to US, NAC contributed to longer OS and DFS, higher 3-year and 5-year DFS rates, and lower incidences of total mortality, overall recurrence and metastasis, and tended to cause higher 5-year OS rates. NAC was associated with reduced risks in recurrence compared to US. Patients receiving NAC had lower surgery and resection rates, but higher R0 resection incidence among resected cases. NAC especially benefited occident patients. The overall NAC response rate was 52.1%, and NAC-related toxicity rate was 58.3%.

Conclusion

NAC may provide better survival, reduced recurrence, and improved R0 resection rates among NSCLC patients who had surgery, especially in occident patients. Further studies are needed to clarify the ethnic differences.

Time-to-event endpoints in operable non-small-cell lung cancer randomized clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

No guideline for time-to-event endpoints (TTEE) definitions in lung cancer trials exists. Areas covered: The aim of the study was to evaluate the reporting of TTEE in operable non-small-cell lung cancer randomized clinical trials. Expert commentary: Sixty-two TTEE were recorded. In the Methods section, using four key points to define TTEE we observed that the 'starting point', 'events', 'information on censoring', 'assessment of events' were clearly defined for 43 (69.4%), 34 (54.8%), 6 (9.7%), 33 (53.2%) endpoints respectively. In the results section, using five key points, we observed that the 'Kaplan-Meier estimation', 'estimation of effect size', 'precision (confidence interval)', 'number of events', 'number of patients at risk', 'multivariate analysis' were clearly identified for 46 (74.2%), 31 (50%), 30 (48.4%), 37 (59.7%), 28 (45.2%), and 17 (27.4%) endpoints, respectively. A majority of articles failed to provide a complete reporting of TTEE. Guidelines for TTEE is warranted.

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) therapy for lung cancer

The Lung Adjuvant Cisplatin Evaluation (LACE) meta-analysis and the meta-analysis of individual participant data reported by non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) Meta-analysis Collaborative Group in neo-adjuvant setting validated respectively that adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy would significantly improve overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival for resectable NSCLC. However, chemotherapy has reached a therapeutic plateau. It has been confirmed that epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) targeting therapy provides a dramatic response to patients with advanced EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC. Researchers have paid more attention to exploring applications of TKIs to early resectable NSCLCs. Several studies on adjuvant TKI treatment concluded its safety and feasibility. But there existed certain limitations of these studies as inference factors to interpret data accurately: the BR19 study recruited patients among which almost 52% had stage IB and only 15 (3.0%, 15/503) had been confirmed with EGFR-mutant type; retrospective studies performed at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) selected EGFR mutant-type NSCLC patients but couldn't avoid inherent defects inside retrospective researches; the RADIANT study revised endpoints from targeting at EGFR immunohistochemistry (IHC)+ and/or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)+ mutation to only EGFR IHC+ mutation, leading to selective bias; despite that the SELECT study validated efficacy of adjuvant TKI and second round of TKI after resistance occurred, a single-arm clinical trial is not that persuasive in the absence of comparison with chemotherapy. Taking all these limitations into account, CTONG1104 in China and IMPACT in Japan have been conducted and recruiting patients to offer higher level of evidences to explore efficacy of preoperative TKI therapy for early resectable EGFR mutation positive NSCLC patients (confirmed by pathological results of tumor tissue or lymph node biopsy). On the other hand, case reports and several phase II clinical trials with small sample size tried to elbow their way on respect of preoperative TKI treatment and advised that TKI tended to improve response rate. However, no data on survival rate was present. The first phase II study of biomarker-guided neoadjuvant therapy for stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC patients stratified by EGFR mutation status, sponsored by CSLC0702, showed erlotinib tended to improve response rate, but failed to show benefits of disease-free survival (DFS) or OS. Subsequently, CTONG1103 was designed to investigate efficacy of erlotinib vs. combination of gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) as neoadjuvant treatment in stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC with sensitizing EGFR mutation in exon 19 or 21. All these ongoing trials should be worthy of our expect to provide convincing evidences for customized therapy for patients with resectable NSCLC.

Systemic and targeted therapies for early-stage lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Even with aggressive surgical treatment, relapse rates remain high for patients with resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In an effort to improve survival in these patients, numerous clinical trials have evaluated neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

The authors reviewed the results of the prospective randomized clinical trials that have established adjuvant chemotherapy as the standard of care for patients with surgically resected NSCLC. In addition, the authors summarize data on predictive and prognostic markers for patients with early-stage NSCLC and discuss novel therapies and clinical trials currently underway in early-stage NSCLC.

RESULTS

Three large randomized clinical trials and two meta-analyses have demonstrated a survival benefit for adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy compared with surgery alone in patients with early-stage NSCLC. As a result, adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is recommended as the standard of care in these patients. Numerous promising biomarkers and agents have been developed in the metastatic setting and are currently being evaluated in the adjuvant setting.

CONCLUSIONS

While adjuvant chemotherapy has improved survival for patients with early-stage NSCLC, the prognosis for early-stage lung cancer remains poor. Incorporation of molecular markers and targeted therapies into the management of patients with advanced NSCLC has improved outcomes. Development of these strategies in the adjuvant setting offers the potential to increase cure rates in patients with early-stage NSCLC.

Preoperative chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Individual participant data meta-analyses of postoperative chemotherapy have shown improved survival for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to do a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis to establish the effect of preoperative chemotherapy for patients with resectable NSCLC.

METHODS

We systematically searched for trials that started after January, 1965. Updated individual participant data were centrally collected, checked, and analysed. Results from individual randomised controlled trials (both published and unpublished) were combined using a two-stage fixed-effect model. Our primary outcome, overall survival, was defined as the time from randomisation until death (any cause), with living patients censored on the date of last follow-up. Secondary outcomes were recurrence-free survival, time to locoregional and distant recurrence, cause-specific survival, complete and overall resection rates, and postoperative mortality. Prespecified analyses explored any variation in effect by trial and patient characteristics. All analyses were by intention to treat.

FINDINGS

Analyses of 15 randomised controlled trials (2385 patients) showed a significant benefit of preoperative chemotherapy on survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0·87, 95% CI 0·78-0·96, p=0·007), a 13% reduction in the relative risk of death (no evidence of a difference between trials; p=0·18, I(2)=25%). This finding represents an absolute survival improvement of 5% at 5 years, from 40% to 45%. There was no clear evidence of a difference in the effect on survival by chemotherapy regimen or scheduling, number of drugs, platinum agent used, or whether postoperative radiotherapy was given. There was no clear evidence that particular types of patient defined by age, sex, performance status, histology, or clinical stage benefited more or less from preoperative chemotherapy. Recurrence-free survival (HR 0·85, 95% CI 0·76-0·94, p=0·002) and time to distant recurrence (0·69, 0·58-0·82, p<0·0001) results were both significantly in favour of preoperative chemotherapy although most patients included were stage IB-IIIA. Results for time to locoregional recurrence (0·88, 0·73-1·07, p=0·20), although in favour of preoperative chemotherapy, were not statistically significant.

INTERPRETATION

Findings, which are based on 92% of all patients who were randomised, and mainly stage IB-IIIA, show preoperative chemotherapy significantly improves overall survival, time to distant recurrence, and recurrence-free survival in resectable NSCLC. The findings suggest this is a valid treatment option for most of these patients. Toxic effects could not be assessed.

FUNDING

Medical Research Council UK.

Developments in the treatment of early NSCLC: when to use chemotherapy

approximately 30% of lung carcinomas are resected and these cases are candidates for adjuvant treatments. The PORT meta-analysis reported in 1999 that postoperative radiotherapy had a detrimental effect for pathological N0 and N1 patients, and a debatable effect for N2 patients. Following the results of the 1995 meta-analysis on the role of chemotherapy (CT) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), many randomized, controlled trials were launched to evaluate the effect of adjuvant cisplatin-based CT after the complete resection of NSCLC. The Lung adjuvant Ciplatin Evaluation pooled analysis included a total of 4584 patients recruited in five recent cisplatin-based adjuvant trials. It confirmed that adjuvant CT was associated with an absolute 5-year survival benefit of 5.3% (P = 0.0043). In addition, it showed that adjuvant cisplatin-based CT is detrimental in cases of stage Ia resected NSCLC; it also suggested that the combination of vinorelbine and cisplatin was of more benefit than older two and three drug combinations. The individual data-based meta-analysis was also updated with a total of over 10 000 patients. It confirmed the substantial effect of postoperative CT, with or without postoperative radiotherapy, with a substantial overall benefit of 4% at 5 years. Recent results of biological programs suggest that evaluating the expression of various tumor markers, including excision repair cross-complementation group 1, may allow the identification of patients most likely to benefit from CT. If these results are confirmed, tailored therapy might be the next step forward for resected NSCLC.

The correlates of benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery in non-small-cell lung cancer: a metaregression analysis

BACKGROUND

Although neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) is widely used, it is not clear which subgroup of locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients should be treated with this approach, and if a particular benefit associated with NCT exists. In this study, we aimed to investigate the potential correlates of benefit from NCT in patients with NSCLC.

METHODS

All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) utilizing a NCT arm (without radiotherapy) versus a control arm before surgery were included for metaregression analysis. All regression analyses were weighed for trial size. Separate analyses were conducted for trials recruiting patients with different stages of disease. Previously published measures of treatment efficacy were used for the purpose of this study, regardless of being published in full text or abstract form.

RESULTS

A total of 14 RCTs, consisting of 3,615 patients, were selected. Histology, stage, various characteristics of the NCT protocol, and different trial features including trial quality score were not associated with the benefit of NCT. However, in trials of stage 3 disease only, there was a greater benefit in terms of reduction in mortality from NCT, if protocols with three chemotherapeutics were used (B = -0.18, t = -5.25, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

We think that patients with stage 3 NSCLC are served better with NCT before surgery if protocols with three chemotherapy agents or equally effective combinations are used. In addition, the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy is consistent with regard to disease and patient characteristics. This finding should be tested in future RCTs or individual patient data meta-analyses.

Survival benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: an updated meta-analysis of 13 randomized control trials

INTRODUCTION

The survival effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is still unclear based on the study of most up-to-date literatures. This article contributes to this problem by conducting an updated meta-analysis.

METHODS

Based on Burdett et al's (J Thorac Oncol 2006;1:611-621) systematic review, this meta-analysis was conducted. Articles were searched electrically. The possible survival benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy was assessed by hazard ratio (HR) in terms of overall survival. A subgroup meta-analysis with only stage III NSCLC was also conducted. The software of Review Manager was used for data management.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized control trials, 6 of which were new ones, were included into this meta-analysis. The overall survival of NSCLC patients in neoadjuvant chemotherapy arm were improved significantly, comparing with those in surgery-alone arm (combined HR = 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.92; p = 0.0001). When only patients with stage III NSCLC were considered, the result was similar (combined HR = 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.95; p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, as an addition of surgery, would significantly improve the overall survival of operable NSCLC patients, including patients with stage III NSCLC.

Preoperative versus postoperative chemotherapy in patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer: systematic review and indirect comparison meta-analysis of randomized trials

INTRODUCTION

A large number of trials have evaluated the efficacy of postoperative chemotherapy on survival after resection for lung cancer, and a smaller number have evaluated preoperative chemotherapy on survival for potentially resectable lung cancer, but no direct comparison has yet been published comparing the two approaches.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of randomized trials, extracted time-to-event data using Parmar methods (when not reported), used random effects meta-analysis to evaluate overall and disease survival treatment effects and performed indirect comparison meta-analysis to obtain the relative hazards of postoperative to preoperative administration on survival.

RESULTS

Data were abstracted from 32 randomized trials involving more than 10,000 participants, with 22 trials administering postoperative and 10 trials administering preoperative chemotherapy. For overall survival, the hazard ratios were 0.80 (0.74-0.87; p < 0.001) and 0.81 (0.68-0.97; p = 0.024) in postoperative chemotherapy group and preoperative chemotherapy group, respectively. Using indirect comparison meta-analysis, the relative hazards of postoperative compared with preoperative administration was 0.99 (0.81-1.21; p = 0.91). For disease-free survival, the hazard ratios were 0.76 (0.67-0.86; p < 0.001) and 0.79 (0.63 to 1.00; P = 0.050) in postoperative chemotherapy group and preoperative chemotherapy group, respectively. Using indirect comparison meta-analysis, the relative hazards of postoperative compared with preoperative administration was 0.96 (0.77-1.20; p = 0.70).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with resectable lung cancer, there was no evidence of a difference in overall and disease-free survival between the timing of administration of chemotherapy (postoperative versus preoperative).

[Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: current state and future]

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) continues to be the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the world. The combination of chemotherapy and surgery is a standard of care for resectable NSCLC. If the adjuvant chemotherapy is a standard, the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy is still debated. Most trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were closed when the positive studies of adjuvant chemotherapy were published. Only the Spanish trial NATCH, designed to compare the neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the adjuvant chemotherapy, was fully completed. Therefore, the trials of preoperative chemotherapy lack strength to become proof of concept. Confirmation will come from meta-analyses. Two of them are positive. Others are in progress. The current research is to select the patients according to predictive factors to chemotherapy response.

Chemotherapy and surgery versus surgery alone in non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The role of pre-operative chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was not clear. A systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis were therefore undertaken to evaluate the available evidence from randomised trials.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of pre-operative chemotherapy on survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. If adequate data are available, to investigate whether or not pre-defined patient subgroups benefit more or less from pre-operative chemotherapy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE and CANCERLIT searches for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were supplemented by information from trial registers and by handsearching relevant meeting proceedings and by discussion with relevant trialists and organisations.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs were eligible for inclusion provided the patients had been randomised between chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone and that the method of randomisation precluded prior knowledge of the treatment to be assigned.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A systematic review and meta-analysis based on aggregate data extracted from trial publications was carried out to assess the effectiveness of pre-operative chemotherapy in NSCLC. This involved identifying eligible RCTs and extracting aggregate data from the abstracts or reports of these RCTs. Hazard ratios were calculated from published summary statistics and then combined to give pooled estimates of treatment efficacy.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve eligible RCTs were identified. Data were available from seven RCTs including 988 patients (75% of eligible patients). Pre-operative chemotherapy increased survival with a hazard ratio of 0.82 (95%CI 0.69-0.97) P = 0.022. This is equivalent to an absolute benefit of 6%, increasing overall survival across all stages of disease from 14% to 20% at 5 years. There was no evidence of statistical heterogeneity (P = 0.980, I(2 )= 0).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This analysis shows a significant increase in survival attributable to pre-operative chemotherapy. This is currently the best estimate of the effectiveness of this therapy, but is based on a small number of trials and patients. This analysis was unable to address important questions such as whether particular types of patients may benefit more or less from pre-operative chemotherapy or whether the early stopping of a number of included RCTs impacted on the results. These issues may be addressed by an ongoing individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis.

Preoperative chemotherapy in patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer: results of the MRC LU22/NVALT 2/EORTC 08012 multicentre randomised trial and update of systematic review

BACKGROUND

Although surgery offers the best chance of cure for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the overall 5-year survival rate is modest, and improvements are urgently needed. In the 1990s, much interest was generated from two small trials that reported striking results with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, and therefore our intergroup randomised trial was designed to investigate whether, in patients with operable non-small cell lung cancer of any stage, outcomes could be improved by giving platinum-based chemotherapy before surgery.

METHODS

Patients were randomised to receive either surgery alone (S), or three cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy followed by surgery (CT-S). Before randomisation, clinicians chose the chemotherapy that would be given from a list of six standard regimens. The primary outcome measure was overall survival, which was analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN25582437.

RESULTS

519 patients were randomised (S: 261, CT-S: 258) from 70 centres in the UK, Netherlands, Germany, and Belgium. Most (61%) were clinical stage I, with 31% stage II, and 7% stage III. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy was feasible (75% of patients received all three cycles of chemotherapy), resulted in a good response rate (49% [95% CI 43%-55%]) and down-staging in 31% (25%-37%) of patients, and did not alter the type or completeness of the surgery (lobectomy: S: 56%, CT-S: 60%, complete resection: S: 80%, CT-S: 82%). Post-operative complications were not increased in the CT-S group, and no impairment of quality of life was observed. However, there was no evidence of a benefit in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1.02, 95% CI 0.80-1.31, p=0.86). Updating the systematic review by addition of the present result suggests a 12% relative survival benefit with the addition of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (1507 patients, HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.76-1.01, p=0.07), equivalent to an absolute improvement in survival of 5% at 5 years

INTERPRETATION

Although there was no evidence of a difference in overall survival with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, the result is statistically consistent with previous trials, and therefore adds considerable weight to the current evidence.

Survival improvement in resectable non-small cell lung cancer with (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy: Results of a meta-analysis of the literature

The recent publication of many randomised trials about (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy in resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has prompted our group to update a prior meta-analysis of the literature. Randomised studies published in French and English between 1965 and June 2004 were included in this analysis. A qualitative assessment of each trial was first performed using the European lung cancer working party (ELCWP) and the Chalmers' scales. In absence of statistically significant quality difference between positive and negative trials, a quantitative aggregation (meta-analysis) of the individual results was performed. Two trials for which data were available on ASCO virtual meeting website were also included in the meta-analysis. Twenty-five studies eligible for this analysis assessed chemotherapy as induction (n = 6) or adjuvant to surgery (n = 19). No quality difference was detected between positive and negative trials according to the two scores, whatever all trials were combined or only adjuvant chemotherapy studies were considered. The overall meta-analysis showed that the hazard ratio (HR) of the combined results was 0.66 (95% CI 0.48-0.93) in favour of the addition of induction chemotherapy to a standard surgical procedure and 0.84 (95% CI 0.78-0.89) in favour of adjuvant chemotherapy. The effect was significant for adjuvant chemotherapy in stages I and II with a HR of 0.88 (95% CI 0.83-0.94). It was not statistically significant in stage III although the trend was in favour of chemotherapy whatever adjuvant (HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.69-1.04) or (neo)adjuvant (HR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.41-1.04) chemotherapy was tested. In conclusion, our meta-analysis shows the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in stages I and II resected NSCLC. More data are needed to confirm such a role for induction chemotherapy. Further trials should separate stage III disease from earlier stages.

Radiotherapy versus chemotherapy plus radiotherapy in surgically treated IIIA N2 non-small-cell lung cancer

Preoperative chemotherapy in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains controversial. Phase II trials utilizing preoperative chemotherapy in selected patients have achieved complete resection rates of 50%-70% with 3-5 year failure-free survival rates of 15%-33%. Between October 1992 and November 1994, 57 adults (50 of whom were evaluable) with surgically staged IIIA NSCLC and pathologically documented ipsilateral mediastinal nodal involvement (N2) were enrolled in a Cancer and Leukemia Group B randomized trial. Preoperative therapy was thought to be critical to facilitating surgical resectability. For patients randomized to the radiotherapy/surgery/radiotherapy (RSR) arm (n = 24), treatment consisted of preoperative radiation therapy (RT) at 40 Gy, surgery, and then additional RT at 14-20 Gy. For patients randomized to the chemotherapy/surgery/chemotherapy/radiotherapy (CSCR) arm (n = 26), treatment consisted of 2 cycles of cisplatin/etoposide with filgrastim support (PE) followed by surgery, 2 more cycles of PE, then RT 54-60 Gy. The total dose of RT on either arm was 54 Gy if completely resected or 60 Gy if incompletely resected or unresected. Clinical characteristics were well balanced between the two arms. Thoracotomy was performed in 42 patients (84%), 28 (67%) of whom had complete resection. The median failure-free and overall survival rates were 12 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9-23 months) and 23 months (95% CI, 19 months-infinity) for the RSR arm and 11 months (95% CI, 5-20 months) and 18 months (95% CI, 12-32 months) for the CSCR arm. The rates of overall and complete surgical resection, downstaging of nodal involvement, and failure-free (P = 0.92) and overall survival (P = 0.41) did not differ between the two treatment arms. Moreover, in this trial, the chemotherapy regimen was sufficiently toxic to have had a lower completion rate of prescribed therapy in the CSCR arm than in the RSR arm.

Gemcitabine induction chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer

Surgery has long been considered standard treatment in early stage non-small cell lung cancer. Preoperative chemotherapy is a real challenge in the treatment of these stages. Some conclusions can be drawn from the first phase II studies in stage IIIA tumors. Response rates were higher than those observed in stage IV tumors, reaching approximately 70%. Although toxicity seemed acceptable, increased morbidity and mortality have to be taken into account for the choice of preoperative regimens. Two randomized studies that included only a few patients were conducted in stage IIIA disease and showed highly positive survival results. The French randomized study argued in favor of preoperative chemotherapy with an absolute difference in survival rates that remains constant beyond the third year. New studies are ongoing to evaluate the role of the gemcitabine/cisplatin combination. Several phase II studies of this regimen in the preoperative setting or in combination with radiotherapy have been presented at the most recent meetings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. These studies confirmed both its efficacy and good tolerability. In several ongoing randomized studies, this combination has been chosen to test the concept of preoperative chemotherapy. One such study, which compares two different strategies of preoperative chemotherapy, is by the Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique.

Preoperative chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer

Surgery has been considered the standard of care in patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), as well as in some cases of stage III, for a long time. Poor survival after complete resection has led to the search for new therapeutic strategies such as combining anticancer treatments. However, at the present time, attempts to combine chemotherapy and radiotherapy after surgery have failed to show any significant impact on survival among patients with completely resected NSCLC.

Evidence-based medicine in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer

Treatment decisions for non-small-cell lung cancer require accurate initial staging of patients. Typically surgical resection is recommended for early stage disease, while chemotherapy in conjunction with radiotherapy and possibly surgical resection is recommended for selected patients with locally advanced disease. Chemotherapy clearly has been demonstrated to improve survival and quality of life in metastatic disease. Surgical, chemotherapeutic, and radiotherapy treatment options as well as the role of multi-modality therapy will be discussed focusing on the evidence for various stages of non-small-cell lung cancer.

The role of induction therapy in the management of resectable non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Combined-modality therapy has become standard for many patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Although surgical resection offers the best chance for long-term survival, the limited number of resectable patients and the presence of occult micrometastatic disease has limited the effectiveness of this modality alone.

METHODS

The authors reviewed several trials involving the use of induction chemotherapy in managing resectable non-small cell lung cancer.

RESULTS

Extensive phase II experience in patients with stage III disease has confirmed the feasibility of this approach. Unfortunately, heterogeneous patient populations and treatment regimens limit the ability to draw firm conclusions from these trials alone. While the phase III experience has been limited, long-term follow-up is now available suggesting that induction therapy may have a beneficial impact on survival, especially for those patients who can be sufficiently downstaged. Recent phase II trials have included stage III patients who have traditionally been considered inoperable. Although encouraging, the role of surgery after chemoradiotherapy for this population of patients remains undefined.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from ongoing randomized trials studying the impact of induction therapy on well-defined patient populations will be necessary before the optimal regimen and patient population can be identified.

Results of pneumonectomy for non-small cell lung cancer

To assess the role of pneumonectomy for lung cancer and the factors affecting the prognosis, 107 patients who had undergone pneumonectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) between January, 1985 and March, 1996, were analyzed. They included 81 squamous cell carcinoma, 22 adenocarcinoma, 3 large cell carcinoma, and one adenosquamous cell carcinoma, with 8 patients in post-operative stage I, 15 in stage II, 51 in stage IIIA, and 33 in stage IIIB of the disease. The 5-year survival rate was 54.7% in stages I + II, 38.0% in stage IIIA, and <4% in stage IIIB. In stages I-IIIA, the patients with squamous cell carcinoma showed a significantly better prognosis than those with adenocarcinoma (50.6 vs. 0%, p < 0.01). The prognosis was also better, but not statistically significant, for patients with central type compared with those with peripheral type in both all histologic types (58.0 vs. 8.4%) and only squamous cell type (59.3 vs. 18.8%). A better prognosis observed in squamous histologic type or central type seemed to be related to a better N factor. Pneumonectomy remains the treatment of choice for lung cancer, but seems not to be justified for patients with stage IIIB due to their poor prognosis.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy of locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was tested in non-small cell lung cancer in an attempt to increase the resectability of the tumor and to treat the microscopic metastatic disease known to be responsible for the majority of failures in surgically treated patients. This review deals with published trials. Most of them are feasibility studies in Stage III NSCLC. Obviously, the heterogeneity of eligibility criteria from one study to another prevents general conclusions on the usefulness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. However, it is possible to conclude that neoadjuvant chemotherapy has an antitumor activity; the majority of the studies report a 60% objective response rate including a significant number of complete responses and a 50% complete resection rate. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not increase morbidity after surgery except when it is combined with preoperative radiation therapy. At the time of writing, one Phase III randomized study comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery with surgery alone has been published. This study concludes that the combined modality treatment improves the survival of patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Taken as a whole, the literature deserves further studies to determine the place of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in lung cancer.

A randomized trial comparing preoperative chemotherapy plus surgery with surgery alone in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of surgery for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer is limited, although recent studies suggest that preoperative chemotherapy may improve survival. We conducted a randomized trial to examine the possible benefit of preoperative chemotherapy and surgery for the treatment of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.

METHODS

We studied 60 patients (59 men and 1 woman) with stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either surgery alone or three courses of chemotherapy (6 mg of mitomycin per square meter of body-surface area, 3 g of ifosfamide per square meter, and 50 mg of cisplatin per square meter) given intravenously at three-week intervals and followed by surgery. All patients received mediastinal radiation after surgery. The resected tumors were evaluated by means of K-ras oncogene analysis and flow cytometry.

RESULTS

The median period of survival was 26 months in the patients treated with chemotherapy plus surgery, as compared with 8 months in the patients treated with surgery alone (P < 0.001); the median period of disease-free survival was 20 months in the former group, as compared with 5 months in the latter (P < 0.001). The rate of recurrence was 56 percent in the group treated with chemotherapy plus surgery and 74 percent in the group treated with surgery alone. The prevalence of mutated K-ras oncogenes was 15 percent among the patients receiving preoperative chemotherapy and 42 percent among those treated with surgery alone (P = 0.05). Most of the patients treated with chemotherapy plus surgery had tumors that consisted of diploid cells, whereas the patients treated with surgery alone had tumors with aneuploid cells.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative chemotherapy increases the median survival in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.

The clinical pharmacology and use of antimicrotubule agents in cancer chemotherapeutics

Although there has been a rapid expansion of the number of classes of compounds with antineoplastic activity, few have played a more vital role in the curative and palliative treatment of cancers than the antimicrotubule agents. Although the vinca alkaloids have been the only subclass of antimicrotubule agents that have had broad experimental and clinical applications in oncologic therapeutics over the last several decades, the taxanes, led by the prototypic agent taxol, are emerging as another very active class of antimicrotubule agents. After briefly reviewing the mechanisms of antineoplastic action and resistance, this article comprehensively reviews the clinical pharmacology, therapeutic applications, and clinical toxicities of selected antimicrotubule agents.