Phase II study of combined belotecan and cisplatin as first-line chemotherapy in patients with extensive disease of small cell lung cancer

Therapies in the pipeline for small-cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION OR BACKGROUND

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) represents ~15% of all cases of lung cancer and is characterized by a rapid tumour doubling time, early onset disease dissemination and high sensitivity to chemotherapy.

SOURCES OF DATA

We searched MEDLINE and OVID databases for articles in English published from January 1980 to February 2015.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Platinum-based chemotherapy, thoracic radiotherapy and prophylactic cranial irradiation are standard of care. Benefit from second-line chemotherapy is limited.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

The role of platinum/irinotecan chemotherapy in the Western population and the role of maintenance therapies remain to be established.

GROWING POINTS

Knowledge of the biology of SCLC has expanded exponentially and many potential therapeutic targets have been identified.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

The use of circulating tumour cells can help investigating molecular alterations occurring within tumour cells, understanding drug resistance mechanisms and evaluating new treatments.

Belotecan/cisplatin versus etoposide/cisplatin in previously untreated patients with extensive-stage small cell lung carcinoma: a multi-center randomized phase III trial

Background

No novel chemotherapeutic combinations have demonstrated superior efficacy to etoposide/cisplatin (EP), a standard treatment regimen for extensive-stage small cell lung carcinoma (ES-SCLC) over the past decade. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of belotecan/cisplatin (BP) and EP regimens in chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-naïve patients with previously untreated ES-SCLC.

Methods

We conducted a multi-center, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, phase III clinical study. A total of 157 patients were recruited at 14 centers with 147 patients meeting the inclusion/exclusion criteria and randomized to either BP (n = 71) or EP (n = 76) treatment arms. A non-inferior response rate (RR) in the BP arm, analyzed by intent-to-treat analysis according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.0 criteria, was used as the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

In the BP arm, one patient had a complete response, 41 had a partial response (PR), and 17 had stable disease (SD). In the EP arm, 35 patients had PR and 28 had SD. The RR in the BP arm was non-inferior to the EP regimen in patients with ES-SCLC (BP: 59.2 %, EP: 46.1 %, difference: 13.1 %, 90 % two-sided confidence interval: -0.3–26.5, meeting the predefined non-inferiority criterion of -15.0 %). No significant differences in OS or PFS were observed between the treatment arms. Hematologic toxicities, including grade 3/4 anemia and thrombocytopenia, were significantly more prevalent in the BP arm than the EP arm.

Conclusions

The RR to the BP regimen was non-inferior to the EP regimen in chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-naïve patients with previously untreated ES-SCLC. Hematologic toxicities were significantly more prevalent in the BP group, indicating that BP should be used with care, particularly in patients with a poor performance status. Further studies assessing PFS and OS are required to validate the superiority of the BP regimen.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00826644. Date of Registration: January 21, 2009.

The role of second-line chemotherapy in small cell lung cancer: a retrospective analysis

Background

To evaluate the benefit of second-line chemotherapy with platinum-based treatment in patients with recurrent small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

Patients and methods

A total of 535 patients continued with follow-up or best supportive care if needed, and 229 patients who progressed after the completion of first-line chemotherapy were treated with second-line chemotherapy at the time of progression. In total, 103/229 patients received paclitaxel 190 mg/m² and carboplatin 5.5 area under the curve while 126/229 patients received etoposide 200 mg/m² and carboplatin 5.5 area under the curve every 28 days.

Results

Patients administered second-line chemotherapy lived significantly longer, with a median survival of 422 days compared to 228 days in patients with best supportive care alone (P<0.001). Patients who received paclitaxel as second-line chemotherapy lived for an average of 462 days (95% confidence interval: 409–514), versus 405 days in the etoposide group (95% confidence interval: 371–438), which was not statistically significant (P=0.086). The overall response rate was 8% for the paclitaxel group and 6% for the etoposide group. Patients with progression of the disease in more than 3 months had significantly better survival compared with those that progressed in less than 3 months (P<0.001).

Conclusion

Continuation with carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/etoposide as second-line chemotherapy has no significant survival impact, and it did not improve response rates.

Chemotherapy advances in small-cell lung cancer

Although chemotherapeutic advances have recently been heralded in lung adenocarcinomas, such success with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) has been ominously absent. Indeed, the dismal outlook of this disease is exemplified by the failure of any significant advances in first line therapy since the introduction of the current standard platinum-etoposide doublet over 30 years ago. Moreover, such sluggish progress is compounded by the dearth of FDA-approved agents for patients with relapsed disease. However, over the past decade, novel formulations of drug classes commonly used in SCLC (e.g. topoisomerase inhibitors, anthracyclines, alkylating and platinum agents) are emerging as potential alternatives that could effectively add to the armamentarium of agents currently at our disposal. This review is introduced with an overview on the historical development of chemotherapeutic regimens used in this disease and followed by the recent encouraging advances witnessed in clinical trials with drugs such as amrubicin and belotecan which are forging new horizons for future treatment algorithms.

Phase II study of camtobell inj. (belotecan) in combination with cisplatin in patients with previously untreated, extensive stage small cell lung cancer

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of belotecan in combination with cisplatin in patients with previously non-treated extensive stage small cell lung cancer. A total of 42 patients were enrolled and treated with combination of belotecan 0.5mg/m2 on daily basis throughout day 1-4 and cisplatin 60 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 3-week cycle, up to 6 cycles. Treatment was continued until the completion of 6 cycles of the chemotherapy, disease progression, detection of unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of the consent, or death of the patient. Response was assessed every 2 cycles of chemotherapy by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.0. Toxicity was assessed by the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE), version 3.0. The overall response rate was 73.8% in an intention to treat population and 83.9% in the evaluable patients. With the median follow up of 9.9 months, the median progression free survival was 6.9 months (95% CI, 6.6-7.2 months), and median overall survival was 11.2 months (95% CI, 9.9-12.5 months). The frequently reported grade ≥3 toxicities were neutropenia (90.2%), thrombocytopenia (63.4%), and anemia (34.1%). Febrile neutropenia was reported in 16 patients (39.0%). Although most of non-hematologic toxicities were grade 1 or 2, there were 4 patient deaths caused by pneumonia complicated by septic shock. Belotecan and cisplatin combination chemotherapy demonstrated a promising efficacy in ED SCLC patients. But, the hematologic toxicity of this regimen requires considerable amount of attention.

Efficacy and toxicity of belotecan for relapsed or refractory small cell lung cancer patients

INTRODUCTION

Belotecan (Camtobell, CKD602) is a new camptothecin-derivative antitumor agent that belongs to the topoisomerase inhibitors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of belotecan monotherapy as a second-line therapy in patients with relapsed or refractory small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

METHODS

Between June 2008 and August 2011, a total of 50 patients with relapsed or refractory SCLC were treated with belotecan 0.5 mg/m for 5 consecutive days, every 3 weeks. We evaluated the overall response rate (ORR), the progression-free survival (PFS), and the overall survival (OS), and toxicity according to sensitivity to initial chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The median age was 66 years (range, 43-84 years) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance was 0 or 1 in 34 patients (68%) and 2 in 16 patients (32%). Twenty patients (40%) had sensitive relapse and 30 patients (60%) had refractory disease. The ORR, PFS, and OS for sensitive patients were 20% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8-40), 2.8 months (95% CI, 0.53-5.06), and 6.5 months (95% CI, 1.58-11.42), respectively. In the refractory group, the ORR, PFS, and OS were 10% (95% CI, 1-21), 1.5 months (95% CI, 1.25-1.75), and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.40-4.60), respectively. Most commonly reported grade-3 or -4 adverse events included neutropenia (54%), thrombocytopenia (38%), and anemia (32%).

CONCLUSION

Belotecan showed modest activity with an acceptable safety profile as a second-line therapy in patients with relapsed or refractory SCLC.