Phase II study of topotecan and paclitaxel for patients with previously untreated extensive stage small-cell lung cancer

Systemic Therapy for Small-Cell Lung Cancer: ASCO-Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing clinicians on the management of patients with small-cell lung cancer.

METHODS

An Expert Panel of medical oncology, thoracic surgery, radiation oncology, pulmonary, community oncology, research methodology, and advocacy experts were convened to conduct a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 1990 through 2022. Outcomes of interest included response rates, overall survival, disease-free survival or recurrence-free survival, and quality of life. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 95 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Evidence-based recommendations were developed to address systemic therapy options, timing of therapy, treatment in patients who are older or with poor performance status, role of biomarkers, and use of myeloid-supporting agents in patients with small-cell lung cancer.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/thoracic-cancer-guidelines.

A phase IIa study of HA-irinotecan, formulation of hyaluronic acid and irinotecan targeting CD44 in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer

Preclinical studies in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) have shown that hyaluronic acid (HA) can be effectively used to deliver chemotherapy and selectively decrease CD44 expressing (stem cell-like) tumour cells. The current study aimed to replicate these findings and obtain data on safety and activity of HA-irinotecan (HA-IR). Eligible patients with extensive stage SCLC were consented. A safety cohort (n = 5) was treated with HA-IR and Carboplatin (C). Subsequently, the patients were randomised 1:1 to receive experimental (HA-IR + C) or standard (IR + C) treatment, to a maximum of 6 cycles. The second line patients were added to the study and treated with open label HA-IR + C. Tumour response was measured after every 2 cycles. Baseline tumour specimens were stained for CD44s and CD44v6 expression. Circulating tumour cells (CTCs) were enumerated before each treatment cycle. Out of 39 patients screened, 34 were evaluable for the study. The median age was 66 (range 39-83). The overall response rates were 69% and 75% for experimental and standard arms respectively. Median progression free survival was 42 and 28 weeks, respectively (p = 0.892). The treatments were well tolerated. The incidence of grade III/IV diarrhea was more common in the standard arm, while anaemia was more common in the experimental arm. IHC analysis suggested that the patients with CD44s positive tumours may gain survival benefit from HA-IR. HA-IR is well tolerated and active in ES-SCLC. The effect of HA-IR on CD44s + cancer stem-like cells provide an early hint towards a potential novel target.

Chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer: a comprehensive review

Combination chemotherapy is the current strategy of choice for treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Platinum containing combination regimens are superior to non-platinum regimens in limited stage-SCLC and possibly also in extensive stage-SCLC as first and second-line treatments. The addition of ifosfamide to platinum containing regimens may improve the outcome but at the price of increased toxicity. Suboptimal doses of chemotherapy result in inferior survival. Early intensified, accelerated and high-dose chemotherapy gave conflicting results and is not considered a standard option outside of clinical trials. A number of newer agents have provided promising results when used in combination regimens, for example, gemcitabine, irinotecan and topotecan. However, more studies are required to appropriately evaluate them. There is a definitive role for radiotherapy in LD-SCLC. However, timing and schedule are subject to further research. Novel approaches are currently being investigated in the hope of improving outcome.

Phase II trial of oral topotecan and intravenous carboplatin with G-CSF support in previously untreated patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer: A North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate the response rate and toxicities of the combination of oral topotecan and carboplatin in patients with untreated extensive stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Previous studies have suggested improved outcomes with a topoisomerase I inhibitor in combination with a platinum agent.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients with previously untreated, ES-SCLC were evaluable in this phase II trial. All patients received oral topotecan 2.0 mg/m per day on days 1 through 5 and carboplatin at an area under curve of 5 on day 5. Treatment was repeated every 21 days up to a total of 6 cycles. All patients received G-CSF.

RESULTS

There were no complete responses and 16 partial responses, for an overall response rate of 62% (95% CI: 41-80). Median time to progression was 6.0 months (95% CI: 4-8), with a median overall survival of 12 months (95% CI: 8-16). This study was closed to accrual early with 26 of a planned 39 patients enrolled because of grade 5 adverse events in 4 (15%) patients (3 neutropenic infections, 1 sudden cardiac death). Eighty-five percent of patients experienced grade 3 or higher hematologic events. The most common severe nonhematologic events included diarrhea, vomiting, dyspnea, hypoxia, and hypotension.

CONCLUSIONS

Although this drug regimen has activity as first-line therapy in ES-SCLC, it is associated with excessive hematologic toxicity, which occurred in spite of growth factor support. Despite promising survival estimates, this particular combination and dose level of oral topotecan and carboplatin cannot be recommended.

Phase I North Central Cancer Treatment Group Trial-N9923 of escalating doses of twice-daily thoracic radiation therapy with amifostine and with alternating chemotherapy in limited stage small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

The primary goal was to identify the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) of thoracic radiation therapy (TRT) that can be given with chemotherapy and amifostine for patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (LSCLC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Treatment began with two cycles of topotecan (1 mg/m(2)) Days 1 to 5 and paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)) Day 5 (every 3 weeks) given before and after TRT. The TRT began at 6 weeks. The TRT was given in 120 cGy fractions b.i.d. and the dose escalation (from 4,800 cGy, dose level 1, to 6,600 cGy, dose level 4) followed the standard "cohorts of 3" design. The etoposide (E) (50 mg/day) and cisplatin (C) (3 mg/m(2)) were given i.v. before the morning TRT and amifostine (500 mg/day) was given before the afternoon RT. This was followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI). The dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were defined as Grade > or =4 hematologic, febrile neutropenia, esophagitis, or other nonhematologic toxicity, Grade > or =3 dyspnea, or Grade > or =2 pneumonitis.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were evaluable for the Phase I portion of the trial. No DLTs were seen at dose levels 1 and 2. Two patients on dose level 4 experienced DLTs: 1 patient had a Grade 4 pneumonitis, dyspnea, fatigue, hypokalemia, and anorexia, and 1 patient had a Grade 5 hypoxia attributable to TRT. One of 6 patients on dose level 3 had a DLT, Grade 3 esophagitis. The Grade > or =3 toxicities seen in at least 10% of patients during TRT were esophagitis (53%), leukopenia (33%), dehydration (20%), neutropenia (13%), and fatigue (13%). The median survival was 14.5 months.

CONCLUSION

The MTD of b.i.d. TRT was 6000 cGy (120 cGy b.i.d.) with EP and amifostine.

Phase II NCCTG trial of oral topotecan and paclitaxel with G-CSF (filgrastim) support in patients with previously untreated extensive-stage small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy and toxicity of oral topotecan and paclitaxel in untreated patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-eight patients received 1.75 mg/m2 of oral topotecan days 1 to 5 and 175 mg/m2 paclitaxel IV over 3 hours on day 5 (after topotecan) every 4 weeks for 6 cycles. Subcutaneous G-CSF at a dose of 5 microg/kg was then given 24 to 48 hours after the last dose of chemotherapy and daily for 10 days.

RESULTS

All 38 patients were available for toxicity and response analysis. A median of 5 treatment cycles was given, with a range of 1 to 7 cycles. Seventeen (45%) patients received at least 6 cycles of treatment. The most common severe adverse events were neutropenia (42.1%), leukopenia (34.2%), thrombocytopenia (18.4%), nausea (18.4%), diarrhea (13.2%), and fatigue (13.2%). Two grade 5 treatment-related evens were seen. The median overall survival was 9.1 month (95% CI: 7.5-13.0 months), with a 1-year survival estimate of 44.7% (95% CI: 31.4-63.7%) and a 2-year survival rate of 5.3% (95% CI: 1.4-20.3%). The median time to progression was 5.0 months (95% CI: 3.8-6.6 months), with a 1-year progression-free rate of 5.8% (95% CI: 1.5-22.2%) and a 2-year progression-free rate of 2.9% (95% CI: 0.4-19.9%). The estimated confirmed response rate was 52.9%.

CONCLUSION

This regimen has shown similar antitumor activity to that achieved with standard therapy. Because of unacceptable toxicity and cost, we do not recommend this regimen in a palliative setting.

Open-Label, Multicenter, Randomized, Phase III Study Comparing Oral Topotecan/Cisplatin Versus Etoposide/Cisplatin As Treatment for Chemotherapy-Naive Patients With Extensive-Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose

This open-label, randomized, multicenter phase III study compared oral topotecan/intravenous cisplatin (TC) with intravenous (IV) etoposide/cisplatin (PE) in patients with untreated extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC).

Patients and Methods

A total of 784 patients were randomly assigned to either oral topotecan 1.7 mg/m2/d × 5 with IV cisplatin 60 mg/m2 on day 5 (n = 389) or IV etoposide 100 mg/m2/d × 3 with IV cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1 (n = 395) every 21 days.

Results

Overall survival (primary end point) was similar between groups (P = .48; median: TC, 39.3 weeks v PE, 40.3 weeks). One-year survival was 31% (95% CI, 27% to 36%) in both groups and the difference of −0.03 (95% CI, −6.53 to 6.47) met the predefined criteria of ≤ 10% absolute difference for noninferiority of TC relative to PE. Response rates were similar between groups (TC, 63% v PE, 69%). Time to progression was slightly but statistically longer with PE (log-rank P = .02; median: TC, 24.1 weeks v PE, 25.1 weeks). The regimens were similarly tolerable. Grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred more frequently with PE (84% v 59%), whereas grade 3/4 anemia and thrombocytopenia occurred more frequently with TC (38% v 21% and 38% v 23%, respectively). Lung Cancer Symptom Scale scores were statistically better with PE, but the differences were small and of debatable clinical significance.

Conclusion

Oral topotecan with cisplatin provides similar efficacy and tolerability to the standard (etoposide with cisplatin) in untreated ED-SCLC and may provide greater patient convenience compared with intravenous etoposide and cisplatin.

Paclitaxel/Carboplatin/Etoposide Versus Paclitaxel/Topotecan for Extensive‐Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network Randomized, Prospective Phase II Trial

PURPOSE

To compare the combination of paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, http://www.bms.com) and topotecan (Hycamtin; Glaxo SmithKline, Philadelphia, http://www.gsk.com) with paclitaxel, carboplatin (Paraplatin; Bristol-Myers Squibb), and etoposide (Etopophos, VePesid; Bristol-Myers Squibb) in patients with previously untreated extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this phase II trial, 120 patients were randomly allocated to receive either topotecan (1.5 mg/m(2) i.v. days 1, 2, and 3) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1) every 21 days orpaclitaxe l (200 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1), carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve 6 i.v. day 1), and etoposide (50 mg/100 mg alternating daily by mouth days 1-10) every 21 days, each regimen for a maximum of eight cycles. The primary end points were objective response rate and time to progression.

RESULTS

The paclitaxel-carboplatin-etoposide combination produced a significantly higher overall response rate (78% versus 48%), longer median time to progression (7.6 months versus 5.5 months), and greater number of patients free from progression at 1 year (14% versus 8%) compared with paclitaxel plus topotecan. There was no difference in overall survival. Toxicities were similar in the two treatment arms.

CONCLUSIONS

The paclitaxel-carboplatin-etoposide combination produced a superior overall response rate and time to progression in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer compared with paclitaxel plus topotecan. The platinum compounds continue to be a necessary component of the initial therapy for these patients.

A randomised phase II study of the efficacy and safety of intravenous topotecan in combination with either cisplatin or etoposide in patients with untreated extensive disease small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

Topotecan (Hycamtin is active in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). This phase II study investigated the efficacy and safety of topotecan in combination with either cisplatin or etoposide in untreated extensive disease SCLC (ED SCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with untreated ED SCLC were randomised to treatment with T/C (topotecan 1.25mg/(m(2)day) IV days 1-5, cisplatin 50mg/m(2) IV day 5; 41 patients) or T/E (topotecan 0.75 mg/(m(2)day) IV days 1-- 5, etoposide 60 mg/(m(2)day) IV days 1-5; 41 patients) every 21 days. Response was evaluated by strict radiological criteria.

RESULTS

Response rates were similar for T/C (63.4%, 95% CI: 48.7-78.2%) and T/E (61.0%, 95% CI: 46-76%) with one patient in each arm who underwent complete response. Median survival was 41.6 weeks (9.6 months) for the T/C group and 43.7 weeks (10.1 months) for the T/E group. Toxicity was primarily haematological in both groups. The proportion of patients with grades 3-4 anaemia was significantly higher in the T/C arm (46.4%) versus 20% with the T/E arm (p=0.018). The proportion of patients with grade 4 neutropenia was not significantly lower with T/C (56.1%) than with T/E (65.0%, p=0.41), as was the incidence of associated events such as sepsis (T/C: 0%; T/E: 9.8%, p=0.11). The overall deliverability of either regimen was similar. The most frequent non-haematological adverse experiences of all grades per patient were nausea (T/C: 43.9%; T/E: 36.6%), and alopecia (T/C: 39.0%; T/E: 56.1%). Topotecan did not appear to increase the frequency of adverse events specifically associated with cisplatin.

CONCLUSION

This study showed T/C and T/E to be effective and well tolerated in patients with ED SCLC and further evaluation of topotecan in first line SCLC is warranted.