Effectiveness and safety of pemetrexed-based doublet versus pemetrexed alone as second-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The efficacy of carboplatin plus nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel after cisplatin plus pemetrexed in non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Carboplatin plus nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-PTX) is one of the available first-line treatments for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. However, the efficacy of carboplatin plus nab-PTX as second-line, remains unknown. We examined the efficacy of carboplatin plus nab-PTX after cisplatin plus pemetrexed in non-squamous NSCLC patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed advanced non-squamous NSCLC patients who received carboplatin plus nab-PTX as a second-line chemotherapy regimen after cisplatin plus pemetrexed in our hospital between March 2013 and December 2017. We assessed clinical characteristics, efficacy, and toxicities.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients were recruited. The overall response rate (ORR) was 29% and the disease control rate (DCR), 69%. The median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 3.7 months (95% CI: 2.4-5.5 months) and the median overall survival, 16.6 months (95% CI:8.8-19.5 months). We assessed the ORR and mPFS using the best overall response in the prior regimen. The ORR and mPFS were better in the PD group (ORR; 44% and mPFS: 5.6 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Carboplatin plus nab-PTX after cisplatin plus pemetrexed in non-squamous NSCLC patients is a treatment option. There were several cases where cisplatin plus pemetrexed was not effective, but Carboplatin plus nab-PTX was.

Second-Line Chemotherapy and Beyond for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

The landscape for the second- and third-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer has changed dramatically over the last two decades. Immunotherapeutic agents have become a preferred choice following progression on platinum-based first-line chemotherapy. However, there remains a role for cytotoxic chemotherapy and pemetrexed and docetaxel (with or without ramucirumab) are approved for single-agent use in the second-line setting. With the discovery of new genetic alterations and the development of novel targeted drugs, the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer following progression on first-line therapy continues to become more complicated as new treatment algorithms evolve.

Wasted research when systematic reviews fail to provide a complete and up-to-date evidence synthesis: the example of lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Multiple treatments are frequently available for a given condition, and clinicians and patients need a comprehensive, up-to-date synthesis of evidence for all competing treatments. We aimed to quantify the waste of research related to the failure of systematic reviews to provide a complete and up-to-date evidence synthesis over time.

METHODS

We performed a series of systematic overviews and networks of randomized trials assessing the gap between evidence covered by systematic reviews and available trials of second-line treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer. We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and other resources sequentially by year from 2009 to March 2, 2015. We sequentially compared the amount of evidence missing from systematic reviews to the randomized evidence available for inclusion each year. We constructed cumulative networks of randomized evidence over time and evaluated the proportion of trials, patients, treatments, and treatment comparisons not covered by systematic reviews on December 31 each year from 2009 to 2015.

RESULTS

We identified 77 trials (28,636 patients) assessing 47 treatments with 54 comparisons and 29 systematic reviews (13 published after 2013). From 2009 to 2015, the evidence covered by existing systematic reviews was consistently incomplete: 45 % to 70 % of trials; 30 % to 58 % of patients; 40 % to 66 % of treatments; and 38 % to 71 % of comparisons were missing. In the cumulative networks of randomized evidence, 10 % to 17 % of treatment comparisons were partially covered by systematic reviews and 55 % to 85 % were partially or not covered.

CONCLUSIONS

We illustrate how systematic reviews of a given condition provide a fragmented, out-of-date panorama of the evidence for all treatments. This waste of research might be reduced by the development of live cumulative network meta-analyses.

[Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Icotinib with Standard Second-line Chemotherapy in Previously Treated Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

This study compared the efficacy and safety of icotinib with standard second-line chemotherapy (single-agent docetaxel or pemetrexed) in previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Thirty-two consecutive patients treated with icotinib and 33 consecutive patients treated with standard second-line chemotherapy in Xuanwu Hospital from January 2012 to July 2013 were enrolled in our retrospective research. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors were used to evaluate the tumor responses, and the progression-free survival (PFS) was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Icotinib was comparable with standard second-line chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC in terms of overall response rate (ORR) (28.1% vs 18.2%, P=0.341), disease control rate (DFS)(43.8% vs 45.5%, P=0.890), and PFS (4.3 months vs 3.8 months, P=0.506). In the icotinib group, the ORR of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutant was significantly higher than that of EGFR unknown or wild type (P=0.017). In multivariate analysis, age, gender, histology, and the optimum first-line treatment response were dependent prognostic factors based on the PFS of the icotinib group. The incidence of adverse events was significantly fewer in the icotinib group than in the chemotherapy group (P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the standard second-line chemotherapy, icotinib is active in the treatment of advanced NSCLC patients, especially with EGFR unknown in the second line, with an acceptable adverse event profile.

The efficacy and safety of pemetrexed-based doublet therapy compared to pemetrexed alone for the second-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: an updated meta-analysis

Background

Pemetrexed is currently recommended as the second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, it is unclear whether pemetrexed-based doublet therapy improves treatment efficacy and safety. Thus, this meta-analysis was performed to resolve this controversial question.

Methods

Electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant articles before April 2015. Hazard ratios (HRs) were used to estimate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and odds ratios (ORs) were used to analyze the overall response rate (ORR) and grade ≥3 toxicities. Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were also evaluated.

Results

A total of 2,519 patients from ten randomized controlled trials were included. Compared to pemetrexed alone, PFS and ORR significantly improved in the pemetrexed-based doublet group (HR, 0.86; 95% CI [confidence interval], 0.75–0.99; P=0.038; and OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.25–3.12; P=0.003, respectively). However, no statistically significant differences in OS were observed between groups (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.83–1.02; P=0.132). In addition, subgroup analyses indicated that improved OS was only observed in nonsquamous NSCLC patients who received the combination of pemetrexed and erlotinib. An increasing incidence of grade ≥3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia was observed in the pemetrexed-based doublet group.

Conclusion

Among patients with advanced NSCLC, pemetrexed-based doublet treatment tended to be associated with improved PFS, ORR, and increased toxicity, but not OS.

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.

Efficacy of combining targeted therapy with pemetrexed or docetaxel as second-line treatment in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of adding targeted agents to standard second-line chemotherapy with a single agent (pemetrexed or docetaxel) in patients with advanced NSCLC, a meta-analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials was performed and overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) were assessed.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The PubMed and Embase databases, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant publications reporting randomized controlled trials between January 2000 and December 2013. Hazard ratios (HRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), or data for calculating HRs with 95% CIs were derived.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials with a total of 6922 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with chemotherapy, combination therapy did not improve OS (HR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.90-1.01; P = 0.081) but improved PFS (HR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.78-0.87; P = 0.000). Survival outcomes did not differ significantly among trials. Combination therapy significantly increased ORR (RR = 1.83; 95% CI, 1.59-2.127; P = 0.000) and DCR (RR = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13-1.23, P = 0.000). Sub-analysis indicated that adding targeted therapy to chemotherapy significantly prolonged OS in patients with non-squamous NSCLC (HR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.87-0.97; P = 0.009). Patients treated with combination therapy had an increased incidence of grade 3 or greater diarrhea (RR = 1.96; 95% CI, 1.37-2.81; P = 0.000), neutropenia (RR = 1.27, 95% CI, 1.14-1.61; P = 0.000) and thrombocytopenia (RR = 4.21, 95% CI, 1.87-9.51; P = 0.001). This meta-analysis has the limitations of heterogeneity among the included trials and not using individual patient data.

CONCLUSIONS

In the second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC, the combination of targeted therapy and chemotherapy significantly increased response rates and progression-free survival, but did not improve overall survival and was more toxic.

Platinum rechallenge in patients with advanced NSCLC: a pooled analysis

INTRODUCTION

The sole agents pemetrexed (PEM), docetaxel and anti-EGFR agents are approved second-line therapies for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure with cisplatin-based doublets. The potential usefulness of platinum-based doublets as rechallenge for second-line chemotherapy has not yet been established.

METHODS

Studies that enrolled NSCLC platinum pre-treated patients were identified using electronic databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE). Pemetrexed and taxanes (TAXs)-based platinum combinations were considered. A systematic review was conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (version 2.2.064) software to calculate the event rate of response and 95% confidence interval. Median weighted progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) time for PEM and TAXs-based doublets were compared by two-sided Student's t test. We tested for significant heterogeneity by Cochran's chi-square test and I(2) index.

RESULTS

Eleven studies published between 1999 and 2012 were included in this analysis with a total of 607 patients enrolled; 468 were treated with PEM-doublets and 139 with TAXs-doublets. The overall response rate was 27.5% with a higher response rate of 37.8% (range, 29.7-46.7%) for TAXs-based treatment vs. 22% (range, 13.4-34.1%) for PEM-based combinations; (p < 0.0001). Median PFS and OS were 3.9 and 8.7 months with weighted PFS of 3.9 vs. 5.3 months (p < 0.0001) and similar OS for PEM vs. TAXs-based doublets.

CONCLUSIONS

With the limitations of small and not randomised trials included, this pooled analysis shows that NSCLC patients who relapsed after a first-line platinum-based chemotherapy obtain a tumour response of 27% from a platinum rechallenge containing PEM or TAXs. Response rate and median PFS appear better with TAXs-than with PEM-doublets.

Pemetrexed for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a major cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Although advanced NSCLC is still incurable, various anti-neoplastic agents have become available for the treatment of this disease. Pemetrexed , a multi-target folate antagonist, has improved the survival of non-squamous NSCLC patients. Currently, pemetrexed is approved for first-line treatment in combination with a platinum derivate, for second-line treatment as a single agent and, more recently, as maintenance treatment after first-line chemotherapy.

AREAS COVERED

The authors analyzed the state of the art of pemetrexed through a review of the literature. Clinical trials and meta-analyses involving pemetrexed in NSCLC were evaluated. Pemetrexed improved survival of non-squamous NSCLC in first-line, maintenance, and second-line treatments; this benefit is limited to non-squamous histology. Because pemetrexed has become part of the standard of care, current clinical trials are designed to compare it to other investigational combinations. Limited data on resectable disease are available, and additional clinical trials are being conducted.

EXPERT OPINION

Pemetrexed has shown effectiveness and a favorable toxicity profile. Histology-driven indications and the relationship of pemetrexed with thymidylate synthase expression suggest that a more precise definition of predictive biomarkers could be further investigated.

A pilot study of extremely low-frequency magnetic fields in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Effects on survival and palliation of general symptoms

The inhibitory effects of magnetic fields (MFs) on tumor cell proliferation in vitro and in vivo have been reported in previous studies. However, the effects of MFs in the treatment of cancer have not been described in clinical trials. We investigated the effects of 420 r/min, 0.4-T extremely low-frequency MFs (ELF-MFs) on the survival and palliation of general symptoms in 13 advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Toxicity and side-effects were assessed according to WHO criteria. The treatment area included the primary tumor site, metastatic sites and metastatic lymph nodes. Additionally, the patients were treated 2 h per day, 5 days per week for 6-10 weeks. The changes in general symptoms were analyzed during ELF-MF treatment and 2 weeks after the completion of therapy. Results of physical examination, routine analysis of blood, ECG and liver function, biochemical and kidney function tests were evaluated before and following treatment. All 13 patients were followed up by outpatient service or telephone interview. Our results demonstrated that decreased pleural effusion, remission of shortness of breath, relief of cancer pain, increased appetite, improved physical strength, regular bowel movement and better sleep quality was detected in 2 (15.4%), 5 (38.5%), 5 (38.5%), 6 (46.2%), 9 (69.2%), 1 (7.7%) and 2 (15.4%) patients, respectively. However, the palliation of symptoms in 2 (15.4%) patients was observed during therapy and disappeared at treatment termination. No severe toxicity or side-effects were detected in our trial. The median survival was 6.0 months (95% CI, 1.0-11.0). The 1- and 2-year survival rates were 31.7 and 15.9%, respectively. This study is the first to describe survival and palliation of general symptoms in advanced NSCLC patients treated with ELF-MFs. As an effective, well-tolerated and safe treatment choice, ELF-MFs may prolong survival and improve general symptoms of advanced NSCLC patients. However, this treatment strategy requires further research.