Randomized phase II study of maintenance irinotecan therapy versus observation following induction chemotherapy with irinotecan and cisplatin in extensive disease small cell lung cancer

Efficacy and Safety of Anlotinib in the Treatment of Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Real-World Observation Study

Aims

This study aimed to observe the efficacy and safety of anlotinib in the treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in the real world, as first-line maintenance therapy, second-line, and above.

Methods

Clinical data of 109 patients with SCLC treated with anlotinib and hospitalized at The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from June 2018 to June 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Analysis of short-term efficacy and survival was performed, with p<0.05 being considered statistically significant.

Results

The median progression-free survival (mPFS) of anlotinib monotherapy used as first-line maintenance treatment of SCLC was 6.3 months (11.7 months in the limited phase and 5.8 months in the extensive phase) and median overall survival (mOS) was 16.7 months (not reached in limited phase, 12.6 months in extensive phase). In second-line treatment, anlotinib with chemotherapy prolonged PFS and OS as compared to anlotinib monotherapy (p<0.05). In third-line and above treatment, there was no improvement in mPFS with the chemotherapy combination regimen compared to anlotinib monotherapy (3.6 months vs. 3.8 months, p=0.398), with a trend toward impaired mOS (8.5 months vs. not achieved, p=0.060). Univariate analyses and multivariate analyses revealed that Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and liver metastases were independent prognostic factors affecting PFS and OS. No new anlotinib-related adverse reactions were identified.

Conclusion

Anlotinib was effective for first-line maintenance and second-line treatment, and the chemotherapy combination regimen was superior to monotherapy when applied as second-line treatment. However, this trend was not observed in third-line and above therapy.

Randomized phase 2 study comparing irinotecan versus amrubicin as maintenance therapy after first-line induction therapy for extensive disease small cell lung cancer (HOT1401/NJLCG1401)

Background

A cisplatin plus irinotecan (CPT‐11) regimen is used for patients with extensive disease small cell lung cancer (ED‐SCLC). Amrubicin (AMR) is primarily used for relapsed SCLC. The HOT1401/NJLCG1401 trial, an open‐label randomized phase II trial, was designed to assess the benefit of maintenance therapy in patients with ED‐SCLC who responded to induction therapy.

Methods

Patients with histologically‐ or cytologically‐confirmed ED‐SCLC were included and were treated with an induction therapy of four cycles of cisplatin (60 mg/m² on day 1) plus CPT‐11 (60 mg/m² on days 1, 8, and 15) every four weeks. After induction therapy, patients who had nonprogressive disease were randomized to receive either maintenance CPT‐11 (60 mg/m² on days 1 and 8) every three weeks, or AMR (35 mg/m² on days 1–3) every three weeks.

Results

A total of 34 patients were enrolled; 20 patients had progressive disease or received incomplete induction chemotherapy. Finally, 14 patients were randomly assigned to receive CPT‐11 (n = 7) or AMR (n = 7). This study was terminated prematurely because of low patient accrual. The overall objective response rate was 73%, the median PFS was 5.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.6–11.8), and the median overall survival was 20.1 months (95% CI: 13.7–not reached). No statistically significant difference in progression‐free survival (PFS) were noted between patients treated with CPT‐11 and those treated with AMR. There were no treatment‐related deaths in this study.

Conclusions

Maintenance therapy with CPT‐11 or AMR after induction therapy might be effective in some patients.

A systematic review of survival following anti-cancer treatment for small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of survival following treatment recommended by the European Society of Medical Oncology for SCLC in order to determine a benchmark for novel therapies to be compared with.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Randomized controlled trials and observational studies reporting overall survival following chemotherapy for SCLC were included. We calculated survival at 30 and 90-days along with 1-year, 2-year and median.

RESULTS

We identified 160 for inclusion. There were minimal 30-day deaths. Survival was 99 % (95 %CI 98.0-99.0 %, I²33.9 %, n = 77) and 90 % (95 %CI 89.0-92.0 %, I²79.5 %, n = 73) at 90 days for limited (LD-SCLC) and extensive stage (ED-SCLC) respectively. The median survival for LD-SCLC was 18.1 months (95 %CI 17.0-19.1 %, I²77.3 %, n = 110) and early thoracic radiotherapy (thoracic radiotherapy 18.4 months (95 %CI 17.3-19.5, I²78.4 %, n = 100)) vs no radiotherapy 11.7 months (95 %CI 9.1-14.3, n = 10), prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI 19.7 months vs No PCI 13.0 months (95 %CI 18.5-21.0, I²75.7 %, n = 78 and 95 %CI 10.5-16.6, I²81.1 %, n = 15 respectively)) and better performance status (PS0-1 22.5 months vs PS0-4 15.3 months (95 %CI 18.7-26.1, I²72.4 %, n = 11 and 95 %CI 11.5-19.1 I²77.9 %, n = 13)) augmented this. For ED-SCLC the median survival was 9.6 months (95 %CI 8.9-10.3 %, I²95.2 %, n = 103) and this improved when irinotecan + cisplatin was used, however studies that used this combination were mostly conducted in Asian populations where survival was better. Survival was not improved with the addition of thoracic radiotherapy or PCI. Survival for both stages of cancer was better in modern studies and Asian cohorts. It was poorer for studies administering carboplatin + etoposide but this regimen was used in studies that had fewer patient selection criteria.

CONCLUSION

Early thoracic radiotherapy and PCI should be offered to people with LD-SCLC in accordance with guideline recommendations. The benefit of the aforementioned therapies to treat ED-SCLC and the use of chemotherapy in people with poor PS is less clear.

Initial management of small-cell lung cancer (limited- and extensive-stage) and the role of thoracic radiotherapy and first-line chemotherapy: a systematic review

Background

Patients with limited-stage (ls) or extensive-stage (es) small-cell lung cancer (sclc) are commonly given platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment. Standard chemotherapy for patients with ls sclc includes a platinum agent such as cisplatin combined with the non-platinum agent etoposide. The objective of the present systematic review was to investigate the efficacy of adding radiotherapy to chemotherapy in patients with es sclc and to determine the appropriate timing, dose, and schedule of chemotherapy or radiation for patients with sclc.

Methods

The medline and embase databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (rcts) comparing treatment with radiotherapy plus chemotherapy against treatment with chemotherapy alone in patients with es sclc. Identified rcts were also included if they compared various timings, doses, and schedules of treatment for patients with es sclc or ls sclc.

Results

Sixty-four rcts were included. In patients with ls sclc, overall survival was greatest with platinum-etoposide compared with other chemotherapy regimens. In patients with es sclc, overall survival was greatest with chemotherapy containing platinum-irinotecan than with chemotherapy containing platinum-etoposide (hazard ratio: 0.84; 95% confidence interval: 0.74 to 0.95; p = 0.006). The addition of radiation to chemotherapy for patients with es sclc showed mixed results. There was no conclusive evidence that the timing, dose, or schedule of thoracic radiation affected treatment outcomes in sclc.

Conclusions

In patients with ls sclc, cisplatin-etoposide plus radiotherapy should remain the standard therapy. In patients with es sclc, the evidence is insufficient to recommend the addition of radiotherapy to chemotherapy as standard practice to improve overall survival. However, on a case-by-case basis, radiotherapy might be added to reduce local recurrence. The most commonly used chemotherapy is platinum-etoposide; however, platinum-irinotecan can be considered.

[Research Progression of Maintenance Therapy in Small Cell Lung Cancer]

Lung cancer is one of the common malignant tumors in the world, the incidence of small cell lung cancer is about 15% among them. Small cell lung cancer is highly sensitive to first-line chemotherapy, but most of the patients relapse after the first-line therapy quickly. Despitemany clinical researchof chemotherapy, biological agents and molecular targeting agents since the 1980s, there still remains a substantial lack of consensus regarding the appropriate therapeutic management on maintenance therapy of small cell lung cancer. The review focuses on maintenance therapy of small cell lung cancer.

Strategies for modern biomarker and drug development in oncology

Technological advancements in the molecular characterization of cancers have enabled researchers to identify an increasing number of key molecular drivers of cancer progression. These discoveries have led to multiple novel anticancer therapeutics, and clinical benefit in selected patient populations. Despite this, the identification of clinically relevant predictive biomarkers of response continues to lag behind. In this review, we discuss strategies for the molecular characterization of cancers and the importance of biomarkers for the development of novel antitumor therapeutics. We also review critical successes and failures in oncology, and detail the lessons learnt, which may aid in the acceleration of anticancer drug development and biomarker discovery.

Small cell lung cancer: therapies and targets

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) remains a fatal disease due to limited therapeutic options. Systemic chemotherapy is the bedrock of treatment for both the limited and extensive stages of the disease. However, the established management paradigm of platinum-based chemotherapy has reached an efficacy plateau. A modest survival improvement, approximately 5%, was witnessed with the addition of cranial or thoracic radiation to systemic chemotherapy. Other strategies to improve outcome of platinum-based chemotherapy in the last two decades have met with minimal success. The substitution of irinotecan for etoposide in the frontline treatment of SCLC achieved significant efficacy benefit in Japanese patients, but similar benefit could not be reproduced in other patient populations. Salvage treatment for recurrent or progressive SCLC is particularly challenging, where topotecan remains the only agent with regulatory approval to date. Ongoing evaluation of biologic agents targeting angiogenesis, sonic hedgehog pathway, DNA repair pathway, and immune checkpoint modulators hold some promise for improved outcome in SCLC. It is hoped that the coming decade will witness the application of new molecular biology and genomic research techniques to improve our understanding of SCLC biology and identification of molecular subsets that can be targeted appropriately using established and emerging biological agents similar to the accomplishments of the last decade with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Long survival of a small-cell lung cancer patient who received maintenance chemotherapy with irinotecan

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) accounts for approximately 15% of all lung cancers. It is characterized by rapid tumor growth and early metastasis to multiple organs. Response to initial chemotherapy is generally good; however, the majority of patients develop recurrence and the prognosis of such patients is reportedly 2–4 months. Evolution of the treatment for SCLC has stagnated, and cisplatin + etoposide has been the standard chemotherapy for decades. Meanwhile, the combination of cisplatin + irinotecan has demonstrated equivalent efficacy to cisplatin + etoposide. Recently, maintenance chemotherapy has been extensively investigated in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and is currently recommended as a standard treatment in clinical guidelines. On the contrary, a maintenance strategy has not been established for SCLC. Here, we describe an SCLC patient who received maintenance chemotherapy with irinotecan for more than 2 years after induction chemotherapy with cisplatin + irinotecan, and survived long term with no recurrence.

Duration of chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Maintenance chemotherapy is widely provided to patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). However, the benefits of maintenance chemotherapy compared with observation are a subject of debate.

METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

To identify relevant literature, we systematically searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Eligible trials included patients with SCLC who either received maintenance chemotherapy (administered according to a continuous or switch strategy) or underwent observation. The primary outcome was 1-year mortality, and secondary outcomes were 2-year mortality, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Of the 665 studies found in our search, we identified 14 relevant trials, which together reported data on 1806 patients with SCLC. When compared with observation, maintenance chemotherapy had no effect on 1-year mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.66-1.19; P = 0.414), 2-year mortality (OR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.57-1.19; P = 0.302), OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.71-1.06; P = 0.172), or PFS (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.62-1.22; P = 0.432). However, subgroup analyses indicated that maintenance chemotherapy was associated with significantly longer PFS than observation in patients with extensive SCLC (HR, 0.72; 95% CI: 0.58-0.89; P = 0.003). Additionally, patients who were managed using the continuous strategy of maintenance chemotherapy appeared to be at a disadvantage in terms of PFS compared with patients who only underwent observation (HR, 1.27; 95% CI: 1.04-1.54; P = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

Maintenance chemotherapy failed to improve survival outcomes in patients with SCLC. However, a significant advantage in terms of PFS was observed for maintenance chemotherapy in patients with extensive disease. Additionally, our results suggest that the continuous strategy is inferior to observation; its clinical value needs to be investigated in additional trials.

Phase II study of oral etoposide maintenance for patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer who have responded to the induction on an EP regimen

BACKGROUND

Maintenance therapy for extensive stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) is still under debate. Many new agents fail during the maintenance course. As an active agent for SCLC, oral etoposide is worth being re-evaluated.

METHODS

This phase II study was performed to evaluate the toxicity/efficacy of the maintenance of patients with oral etoposide with ES-SCLC responding (complete remission [CR] + partial remission [PR]) to the induction of four cycles of etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) chemotherapy. Maintenance therapy with oral etoposide (50 mg/m² , day 1-14, repeated every 21 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurs) was administered. The primary endpoints were grade 3 and 4 toxicities and progression free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients with ES-SCLC received standard EP regimens as induction therapy; 31 responding patients were administered oral etoposide as the maintenance treatment. The most common hematological and non-hematological toxicity of the maintenance course was neutropenia and fatigue, respectively. Median PFS was nine months (95% confidence interval (CI): 8.33∼9.67 months), median overall survival (OS) was 14 months (95% CI: 11.58∼16.42 months). Significantly better PFS and OS were seen in patients responding to the induction EP chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral etoposide maintenance is safe and effective for patients with ES-SCLC who responded to the induction of EP chemotherapy. Significant survival benefit was revealed in patients completely responding to an EP regimen. Further randomized control study is warranted.

A genome-wide association study of survival in small-cell lung cancer patients treated with irinotecan plus cisplatin chemotherapy

We conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) influencing overall survival (OS) of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients. We prospectively collected blood samples from 139 SCLC patients who participated in phase II studies of irinotecan and cisplatin (IP) chemotherapy as first-line therapy. Among 334 127 SNPs, which passed quality control, seven showed significant association with OS. The rs16950650CT, rs7186128AG or GG, rs17574269AG, rs8020368CC, rs4655567CC, rs2166219TT or rs2018683TT showed shorter OS compared with control alleles. Among the seven SNPs, rs4655567, rs8020368 and rs2018683 were significantly associated with a resistant relapse (RR). In the multivariate analysis, rs8020368CC was significantly associated with higher risk of RR (odds ratio=16.7, P=0.007). In vitro and in silico analysis showed that SNPs in C14orf49 might be associated with epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition. This exploratory GWAS identified candidate SNPs that may be predictive of the clinical outcome of SCLC patients receiving IP.