Comparison of irinotecan/platinum versus etoposide/platinum chemotherapy for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis

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.

Phase II study of IRInotecan treatment after COmbined chemo-immunotherapy for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: Protocol of IRICO study

INTRODUCTION

Combined treatment using anti-programmed death-ligand 1 antibody (anti-PD-L1) and platinum-etoposide is the current standard first-line treatment for patients with extensive-stage (ES) small cell lung cancer (SCLC). However, the best treatment for relapsed ES-SCLC after the first-line treatment remains unclear. There are some approved chemotherapeutic agents that can be used against ES-SCLC, and treatment with irinotecan is well established as both a monotherapy and a combined therapy, in combination with platinum. Therefore, we conduct a phase II study with irinotecan in the second- or later-line setting for patients with ES-SCLC who have been previously treated with combined treatment.

METHODS

Our study will enroll total 30 patients who are diagnosed with ES-SCLC and have experienced disease progression after the combined treatment. Patients will receive irinotecan on days 1, 8, and 15, which will be repeated every 4 weeks. Doses of irinotecan (100/80/60 mg/m2 ) will be determined according to the type of UGT1A1 gene polymorphism, and the treatment will be discontinued following disease progression, intolerance, withdrawal of patient consent, and based on the investigator's decision. The primary endpoint of the study is the response rate, and the secondary endpoints are overall survival, progression-free survival, and safety.

DISCUSSION

Since the present first-line treatment has been changed to the combined treatment, the second- or later-line treatment should be re-evaluated for patients with relapsed SCLC. Irinotecan is a major chemotherapeutic agent used for SCLC. This study demonstrates and re-evaluates the clinical benefits of irinotecan after combined treatment with anti-PD-L1 and platinum-etoposide for patients with ES-SCLC.

REGISTRATION DETAILS

This study was registered in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (no. jRCT s071210090) on November 4, 2021.

Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Current Landscape and Future Prospects

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is characterized by aggressive disease progression and tendency to metastasize. Although chemotherapy for extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC) has remained unchanged for decades, immune checkpoint inhibitors have become the primary therapy for ES-SCLC. However, the number of patients benefiting from immunotherapy is limited, and the treatment outcomes remain unsatisfactory. In addition, predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy have not yet been identified. Recent reports have shed light on the genomics of SCLC and defined four distinct molecular subtypes based on transcription factor expression. This may increase our understanding of the biology of SCLC and identify novel therapeutic targets and drugs. In this article, we review the current standard management of ES-SCLC and present the most recent reports to further our understanding of molecular classification, predictive biomarkers, and prospective therapies, including immunotherapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy.

Head and neck small-cell carcinoma: A multicenter study of 39 cases from 10 institutions

Objective

Basal information of head and neck small-cell carcinoma (HNSmCC) including epidemiology, primary site, treatment, and prognosis remains sparse due to its rarity. We report here a multicenter retrospective study on the diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of patients with HNSmCC.

Materials and methods

This study involved 47 patients with HNSmCC from 10 participating institutions. Eight patients were excluded for whom no pathological specimens were available (n = 2) and for discrepant central pathological judgements (n = 6). The remaining 39 patients were processed for data analysis.

Results

As pretreatment examinations, computed tomography (CT) was performed for the brain (n = 8), neck (n = 39), and chest (n = 32), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the brain (n = 4) and neck (n = 23), positron emission tomography-CT (PET-CT) in 23 patients, bone scintigraphy in 4, neck ultrasonography in 9, and tumor markers in 25. Primary sites were oral cavity (n = 1), nasal cavity/paranasal sinuses (n = 16), nasopharynx (n = 2), oropharynx (n = 4), hypopharynx (n = 2), larynx (n = 6), salivary gland (n = 3), thyroid (n = 2), and others (n = 3). Stages were II/III/IV-A/IV-B/IV-C/Not determined = 3/5/16/6/5/4; stage IV comprised 69%. No patient had brain metastases. First-line treatments were divided into 3 groups: the chemoradiotherapy (CRT) group (n = 27), non-CRT group (n = 8), and best supportive care group (n = 4). The CRT group included concurrent CRT (CCRT) (n = 17), chemotherapy (Chemo) followed by radiotherapy (RT) (n = 5), and surgery (Surg) followed by CCRT (n = 5). The non-CRT group included Surg followed by RT (n = 2), Surg followed by Chemo (n = 1), RT alone (n = 2), and Chemo alone (n = 3). The 1-year/2-year overall survival (OS) of all 39 patients was 65.3/53.3%. The 1-year OS of the CRT group (77.6%) was significantly better compared with the non-CRT group (31.3%). There were no significant differences in adverse events between the CCRT group (n = 22) and the Chemo without concurrent RT group (n = 9).

Conclusion

Neck and chest CT, neck MRI, and PET-CT would be necessary and sufficient examinations in the diagnostic set up for HNSmCC. CCRT may be recommended as the first-line treatment. The 1-year/2-year OS was 65.3%/53.3%. This study would provide basal data for a proposing the diagnostic and treatment algorithms for HNSmCC.

Burden of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression among patients with ES-SCLC in US community oncology settings

Aim: To describe the burden of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression among chemotherapy-treated patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Materials & methods: Occurrence of grade ≥3 myelosuppressive hematological adverse events (HAEs), treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) after chemotherapy initiation were evaluated using data from The US Oncology Network and Non-network clinics (1/1/2015-12/31/2020). Results: Among patients with laboratory values (Network: N = 1,374/1,574; Non-network: N = 661/959), over half-experienced grade ≥3 HAEs after chemotherapy initiation (Network = 56.6%; Non-network = 64.1%), and approximately one-third had grade ≥3 HAEs in at least two lineages (Network = 33.0%; Non-network = 31.3%). Patients with grade ≥3 HAEs had greater dose reductions, treatment delays and HCRU than those without. Conclusion: Myelosuppression is a burden to patients with ES-SCLC treated with chemotherapy and the healthcare system.

Budget impact analysis of trilaciclib for decreasing the incidence of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer in the United States

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression, which commonly manifests as neutropenia, anemia, and/or thrombocytopenia, is a frequent and severe complication of standard treatment regimens for patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Trilaciclib is a first-in-class myeloprotective therapy indicated to decrease the incidence of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression when administered prior to a platinum-/etoposide-containing regimen or topotecan-containing regimen for ES-SCLC. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the budget impact of administering trilaciclib prior to chemotherapy to manage chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression in adults with ES-SCLC from a US payer perspective. METHODS: A budget impact model was developed to assess the impact of introducing trilaciclib to a hypothetical 1 million-member health insurance plan. The model compared 2 market scenarios: a current scenario of standard treatments for ES-SCLC without trilaciclib, and an alternative scenario of standard treatment plus trilaciclib. Population, clinical, and cost inputs were derived from published literature and trilaciclib clinical trial data. Model outcomes included the number of myelosuppressive adverse events (AEs), costs of treatment, costs of AE management, total cost, and per-member per-month (PMPM) costs. The budget impact of trilaciclib was calculated as the difference in cost (2021 US dollars) between the 2 scenarios over a 1- to 5-year time horizon. Scenario and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty around key model inputs. RESULTS: An estimated total of 301 patients were eligible for treatment with trilaciclib over a 5-year period. The use of trilaciclib was estimated to reduce the number of myelosuppressive AEs over a 5-year period (events avoided included 108 for neutropenia, 7 for febrile neutropenia, 23 for anemia, and 46 for thrombocytopenia) compared with the scenario without trilaciclib. The adoption of trilaciclib was associated with a cost saving of $801,254 ($0.013 PMPM) over 5 years. The acquisition cost for trilaciclib ($3,704,199) was offset by the reduction in AE management cost ($4,282,748) and reduction in prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use ($222,704). The cost savings associated with trilaciclib began in year 1 (total $34,388; $0.003 PMPM) and accrued over time. CONCLUSIONS: The acquisition cost of trilaciclib is projected to be offset by a reduction in the costs of managing AEs related to myelosuppression when added to standard chemotherapy regimens for ES-SCLC. The net budget impact of trilaciclib is estimated to be a cost saving. DISCLOSURES: This research was funded by G1 Therapeutics, Inc., and implemented by ZS Associates, an independent consultancy that collated the model inputs and performed the budget impact analysis. The study sponsor was involved in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the report; and the decision to submit the report for publication. The journal open access fee was funded by G1 Therapeutics, Inc. Moran, Chioda, and Huang are employed by G1 Therapeutics, Inc. Chioda and Huang report stocks and stock options for G1 Therapeutics, Inc. Goyal and Deniz are employed by ZS Associates. Goyal reports consulting fees from G1 Therapeutics, Inc. Abraham reports consulting fees from Coherus, G1 Therapeutics, Inc. (unrelated to this study and manuscript), Mylan/Viatris, and Sandoz and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for G1 Therapeutics, Inc. MacDonald reports consulting fees from Coherus, G1 Therapeutics, Inc. (unrelated to this study and manuscript), Mylan/Viatris, and Sandoz. Deniz reports no disclosures. A synopsis of the current study was presented in poster format at the Virtual AMCP Annual Meeting, April 12-16, 2021.

Platinum-doublet chemotherapy as second-line treatment for relapsed patients with small-cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Optimal second-line chemotherapy for patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer remains debatable. In addition to topotecan or amrubicin monotherapy, re-challenge with first-line platinum-doublets have been commonly used. In this study, we investigated whether platinum-doublets are suitable as second-line treatment for relapsed small-cell lung cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Studies that enrolled relapsed small-cell lung cancer and compared platinum-doublets with non-platinum-based regimens for second-line treatment were identified using PubMed and EMBASE. A meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the relative risk of objective response rate and disease control rate of the second-line chemotherapy. Subgroup analyses were conducted to focus on comparison with standard second-line regimens and sensitive relapse. Progression-free and overall survival, and adverse events were systematically reviewed.

RESULTS

Ten studies published between 2011 and 2020 were included in our analysis with a total of 1222 patients: 438 treated with platinum-doublets and 784 with non-platinum-based regimens. The objective response rates for second-line platinum-doublet and non-platinum regimens were 47.3 % [95 % CI: 40.5-54.0] and 31.5 % [95 % CI: 22.2-40.8], respectively.　Patients treated with platinum-doublets had a significantly higher objective response rate than patients with non-platinum-based regimens (RR [95 % CI]: 1.527 [1.100-2.121], p = 0.011), as well as disease control rate (RR [95 % CI]: 1.152 [1.052-1.262], p = 0.002). In a subgroup analysis comparing platinum-doublets with topotecan or amrubicin, patients treated with platinum-doublets had significantly higher objective response rate and disease control rate (RR [95 % CI]: 1.663 [1.055-2.619], p = 0.028 and 1.170 [1.021-1.340], p = 0.023 respectively). Progression-free and overall survival appeared consistent with the tumor responses. Adverse events associated with platinum-doublets appeared acceptable compared with the monotherapies.

CONCLUSION

Platinum-doublet chemotherapy as second-line treatment for patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer can be considered as a reasonable option in comparison with non-platinum regimens.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Immunotherapeutic Regimens with PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors for Previously Untreated Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Improving therapeutic strategies for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) remains a challenge. To date, no reports have directly compared the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors plus platinum–etoposide (ICIs+EP) with platinum–irinotecan (IP) or directly compared different ICIs+EP for previously untreated ES-SCLC. This study used a Bayesian approach for network meta-analysis to compare efficacy and safety between ICIs+EP and IP and between each pair of three ICIs+EP. The six treatment arms were: pembrolizumab plus platinum–etoposide (Pem+EP), durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide (Dur+EP), atezolizumab plus platinum–etoposide (Atz+EP), platinum–amrubicin (AP), IP, and platinum–etoposide (EP). No significant differences in overall survival were observed between ICIs+EP and IP and between each pair of three ICIs+EP. The incidence of ≥grade 3 adverse events (G3-AEs) was significantly higher in ICIs+EP than IP, whereas no significant difference was found in G3-AEs between each pair of three ICIs+EP. The incidence of ≥grade 3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia was significantly higher in ICIs+EP than IP, whereas the incidence of ≥grade 3 diarrhea was significantly lower in ICIs+EP than IP. These findings will help clinicians better select treatment strategies for ES-SCLC.

Systematic review of first-line chemotherapy for chemo-naïve extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Our goal was to organize the data from randomized controlled trials that evaluated first-line chemotherapy for chemo-naïve extensive disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC).

METHODS

The protocol following PRISMA methodology was submitted as PROSPERO 154049. We included individually randomized trials comparing two or more chemotherapy regimens as the first-line treatment for chemo-naïve ED-SCLC regardless of the age, sex, performance status, co-morbidities, and organ functions written in the English language since 2000. Molecular targeted agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors were considered chemotherapy along with cytotoxic medications. We pooled the logarithm of hazard ratio (HR) and its standard error using the frequentist weighted least squares approach random-model network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 46 eligible trials that involved 11,987 patients were included. The primary endpoint, HR of overall survival (OS, HRos) of the selected comparisons was as follows: carboplatin+amrubicin (HRos 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-0.96), carboplatin+etoposide+atezolizumab (HRos 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.92), and carboplatin+irinotecan (HRos 0.73, 95% CI 0.58-0.91) were compared with carboplatin+etoposide. The carboplatin+etoposide+atezolizumab regimen was compared with carboplatin+irinotecan (HRos 0.97, 95% CI 0.68-1.37) and cisplatin+irinotecan regimen (HRos 0.87, 95% CI 0.58-1.31). "Selective carboplatin or cisplatin (CBDCA/CDDP)"+etoposide+durvalumab was compared with CBDCA/CDDP+etoposide (HRos 0.73, 95% CI 0.59-0.91). Platinum+etoposide+durvalumab was compared with platinum+irinotecan (HRos 0.88, 95% CI 0.67-1.15). Cumulative meta-analysis suggested that platinum+irinotecan was associated with better OS than platinum+etoposide as of 2010 through 40 out of 46 trials in our review that used platinum+etoposide as a reference regimen.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with carboplatin+amrubicin, carboplatin+etoposide+atezolizumab, CBDCA/CDDP+etoposide+durvalumab, and platinum+irinotecan showed better HRos than those treated with platinum+etoposide, one of the standard regimens.

Comparison of First-Line Treatments for Patients With Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Combinations of chemotherapy with immunotherapy or bevacizumab in first-line treatments of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) have been evaluated in various clinical trials. However, it remains unclear what the optimal combination regimen is.

OBJECTIVE

To clarify which first-line combination regimen is associated with the best tumor response among patients with ES-SCLC.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science) were systematically searched to extract eligible literature from database inception to December 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Head-to-head randomized clinical trials on first-line treatments for patients with ES-SCLC were included with outcomes and toxic effects reported, including objective response rate (ORR, involving complete response and partial response), disease control rate (DCR, involving complete response, partial response, and stable disease), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) of grades 3 to 5. Of 199 eligible articles, 14 were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were independently extracted and collected by 2 reviewers based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Main outcomes were OS, PFS, DCR, ORR, and TRAEs of grades 3 to 5.

RESULTS

A total of 3 phase 2 and 11 phase 3 randomized clinical trials involving 4838 patients were included. Programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor (durvalumab and atezolizumab) plus etoposide-based chemotherapy, compared with etoposide-based chemotherapy alone, showed the most favorable OS (hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.09-1.80) and the best DCR (odds ratio [OR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.21-0.81). Bevacizumab plus etoposide-based chemotherapy provided the best PFS compared with etoposide-based chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.09-2.27), although this was not translated into OS benefit. The addition of PD-L1 inhibitors to etoposide-platinum chemotherapy caused no more toxic effects in general (compared with etoposide-based chemotherapy alone: OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.36-2.31), while bevacizumab plus etoposide-platinum regimen induced the most TRAEs grades 3 to 5 among all first-line treatments (eg, compared with irinotecan-platinum regimen: OR, 4.24; 95% CI, 1.26-14.57). Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve value, PD-L1 inhibitor plus etoposide-platinum had the highest probability of being ranked first for OS (0.87) and DCR (0.97).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this systematic review and network meta-analysis suggest that the combination of a PD-L1 inhibitor (durvalumab and atezolizumab) and etoposide-based chemotherapy may be an optimal first-line treatment option for patients with ES-SCLC patients.

The efficacy of amrubicin third-line chemotherapy in patients with relapsed extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer: A retrospective and historical study in a single institute

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of amrubicin for relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) has been reported in previous studies. Few reports, however, describe the efficacy and survival benefit of third-line amrubicin chemotherapy in patients with extensive disease (ED)-SCLC.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical records of ED-SCLC patients treated with amrubicin salvage chemotherapy as a third-line chemotherapy between January 2005 and July 2016 (salvage amrubicin group). The efficacy and toxicities of amrubicin were evaluated. Overall survival (OS) in the amrubicin salvage group was compared with OS among ED-SCLC patients treated with at least second-line chemotherapy between May 2000 and July 2016 and without subsequent amrubicin salvage chemotherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 18 patients with a median age of 70 years were analyzed in the amrubicin salvage group. The median number of treatment cycles of amrubicin was four. The response rate was 27.8% (95% confidence interval (CI), 7.1%-48.5%), and the disease control rate (DCR) was 66.7% (95% CI, 44.9%-88.4%). Median progression-free survival was 2.9 months (95% CI, 1.0-4.9 months), and median OS after an initial chemotherapy was 18.1 months (95% CI, 10.2-26.0 months). OS in the amrubicin salvage group was significantly longer than in the no-amrubicin group (n = 19; 12.6 months, 95% CI, 11.5-13.8 months, P = 0.005). The frequency of neutropenia greater than grade 3 was 72.2%, with febrile neutropenia developing in 38.9% of patients in the amrubicin salvage group.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a high frequency of febrile neutropenia, amrubicin salvage chemotherapy may improve OS in patients with relapsed ED-SCLC.

Maintenance with lanreotide in small-cell lung cancer expressing somatostatine receptors: A multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial

OBJECTIVES

Considering the frequent expression of somatostatine receptors, we designed the G04.2011 trial to investigate the efficacy of the somatostatine analogue lanreotide in maintenance for SCLC patients after response to standard treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial was conducted in SCLC expressing somatostatine receptors at baseline Octreoscan, responding after platinum-based chemotherapy with/without radiotherapy. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive maintenance lanreotide 120 mg subcutaneously every 28 days, up to 1 year or progression versus observation. Randomization was stratified according to stage (limited/extended, LD/ED). The primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and safety.

RESULTS

Seventy-one patients were randomly assigned (39 to lanreotide, 32 to observation) in 9 Italian institutions. Median PFS was 3.6 (95% CI 3.2-3.9) with lanreotide versus 2.3 months (95% CI 1.7-2.9) with observation (HR 1.51, 95% CI 0.90-2.50; P = 0.11). Stage was an independent predictor for PFS (HR 3.14, 95% CI 1.77-5.57; P < 0.0001). Median PFS was 7.0 (95% CI <1-13.5) with lanreotide versus 3.8 months (95% CI <1-8.6) with observation in LD (P = 0.21), and 3.0 (95% CI 2.2-3.8) versus 2.2 (95% 1.7-2.7) in ED (P = 0.19). Median OS was 9.5 (95% CI 4.8-14.3) with lanreotide versus 4.7 months (95% CI <1-16.6) with observation (P = 0.47). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 28% of patients with lanreotide (grade 3 in two patients).

CONCLUSION

Although survival outcomes were not significantly prolonged with lanreotide as a maintenance in SCLC expressing somatostatin receptors after response to standard treatment, lanreotide showed a slight PFS benefit in LD SCLC deserving further investigations.

Real-world effectiveness and tolerability of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) treatments: A systematic literature review (SLR)

OBJECTIVES

SCLC makes up approximately 15% of all lung carcinomas and is characterized by relatively aggressive spread and poorer prognosis compared to other lung cancers. Treatment options are limited, and their efficacy in randomized trials is poor, whilst outcomes in clinical practice remain unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the real-world effectiveness and tolerability of SCLC treatments.

METHODS

An SLR was conducted across nine databases accessed through OVID, capturing observational, non-randomized studies published between 01/2006-11/2018. In total, 554 abstracts were retrieved and systematically screened for eligibility. The eligible publications included effectiveness and tolerability data from adult SCLC patients (at any line of therapy). Additional grey literature searches were conducted.

RESULTS

Forty-three publications were included in this review-data from first-line therapies were captured most often (n = 32), while data from second (n = 14) and third line (n = 7) and beyond (n = 7) were less frequent. The publications reported primarily on chemotherapy/radiotherapy. The majority of publications lacked robustness and only 14/43 conducted statistical analyses or controlled for bias. Median OS for the largest SCLC populations were 9.6 months at first line (n = 23,535) and 4.9 months at second line (n = 254) for treatment with chemotherapy, and 4.7 months at third line (n = 120) for predominantly platinum-based chemotherapy or cyclophosphamide/adriamycin/vincristine. Hematologic toxicities (such as neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia) were the most frequently reported TRAEs (n = 9).

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world treatment effectiveness and tolerability data were fragmented and inconsistently reported, and available publications were primarily of poor quality and lacked statistical analyses. This SLR showed limited treatment options and poor OS in SCLC, with no treatment option being clearly superior. TRAEs additionally increased the burden of this already challenging disease. Recent data suggest real-world outcomes are even poorer that those reported in clinical trials, and that novel therapies are needed to offer new treatment options for patients.

Topoisomerase I inhibitor, irinotecan, depletes regulatory T cells and up-regulates MHC class I and PD-L1 expression, resulting in a supra-additive antitumor effect when combined with anti-PD-L1 antibodies

Anti-PD-L1 antibodies inhibit interactions between PD-L1 and PD-1 and interactions between PD-L1 and B7-1, thereby reinvigorating anticancer immunity. Although there are numerous ongoing clinical studies evaluating combinations of standard chemotherapies and anti-PD-L1 antibodies, irinotecan has not yet been investigated in this context so there is little information about its compatibility with anti-PD-L1 antibodies. Here we investigated the efficacy of anti-PD-L1 antibody in combination with irinotecan and the role of irinotecan in the tumor–immunity cycle in an FM3A murine tumor model. Despite a transient decrease in lymphocytes in the peripheral blood after irinotecan treatment, the antitumor activity of anti-PD-L1 antibody plus irinotecan was significantly greater than each agent alone. Irinotecan in combination with anti-PD-L1 antibody enhanced proliferation of CD8⁺ cells in both tumors and lymph nodes, and the number of tumor-infiltrating CD8⁺ cells was higher than either irinotecan or anti-PD-L1 antibody monotherapy. Irinotecan was found to decrease the number of Tregs in lymph nodes and tumors, and specific depletion of Tregs by anti-folate receptor 4 antibodies was found to enhance the proliferation of CD8⁺ cells in this model. In addition, irinotecan augmented MHC class I expression on tumor cells and concurrently increased PD-L1 expression on tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells. These results indicate that irinotecan may enhance the effect of T cell activation caused by anti-PD-L1 treatment by reducing Tregs and augmenting MHC class I–mediated tumor antigen presentation, and concurrent upregulation of PD-L1 expression can be blocked by the anti-PD-L1 antibody. These interactions may contribute to the superior combination effect.

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.