Small or Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Based Therapy for Treatment of Large Cell Neuroendocrine Cancer of The Lung? University of Cincinnati Experience

Effect of Adjuvant and Palliative Chemotherapy in Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of the Lung: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Adjuvant chemotherapy revealed a better outcome than surgery only, but there was no statistical difference in patients with stage IA. The small cell lung cancer regimen (SCLC) was frequently selected in adjuvant chemotherapy. The SCLC regimen showed better survival than the non-SCLC regimen as palliative chemotherapy at the endpoint of the odds ratio of mortality after two years.

Abstract

Background: Pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) is a rare subset of lung carcinoma with poor overall survival. Methods: A systematic review following a meta-analysis of studies was performed to identify the effect of different selections of chemotherapy in LCNEC. Articles providing overall survival data for adjuvant chemotherapy or palliative chemotherapy for LCNEC were eligible. The odds ratio (OR) of mortality at one or two years after chemotherapy was evaluated. Results: A total of 16 reports were finally included in the quantitative synthesis, involving a total of 5916 LCNEC patients. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 1303 patients, and palliative chemotherapy was administered to 313 patients using either a small cell lung cancer (SCLC) or a non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) regimen. The OR for adjuvant chemotherapy was 0.73 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.59 to 0.89, p = 0.002). The SCLC regimen showed an OR of 0.52 (95% CI: 0.11 to 2.38, p = 0.40) after one year, and 0.32 (95% CI: 0.11 to 0.89, p = 0.03) after two years, compared with the NSCLC regimen. Conclusions: Adjuvant chemotherapy for pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma improved the outcome after surgery. The SCLC regimen showed better survival than the NSCLC regimen as palliative chemotherapy.

Survival outcomes of surgery in patients with pulmonary large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma: a retrospective single-institution analysis and literature review

Background

Pulmonary large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (pLCNEC) is a very rare malignancy originating from the lung and bronchus, and its biological behaviour, clinical diagnosis, treatment and prognosis are poorly understood. Thus, the clinical characteristics and surgical treatment-related prognostic factors of this rare disorder must be explored.

Results

The clinical data of 59 patients (48 males and 11 females) who were treated by surgery and diagnosed with pLCNEC by postoperative pathology at Peking Union Medical College Hospital from April 2004 to April 2019 were analysed retrospectively. The median patient age was 62 years (38–79 years), and the median duration of disease was 2 months (0.5–18 months). Compared with other lung malignancies, pLCNEC lacks specific clinical symptoms and imaging features, and preoperative biopsy pathology is often insufficient to confirm the diagnosis. The corresponding numbers of patients who were classified into stages I, II, III and IV according to the postoperative pathological tumour-nodal-metastasis stage were 25, 12, 15 and 7, respectively. The median overall survival was 36 months (0.9–61.1 months). The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year survival rates were 76.3%, 49% and 44.7%, respectively. The tumour stage exerted a significant effect on survival (Cox multivariate analysis p < 0.05).

Conclusions

For patients with resectable pLCNEC, multidisciplinary therapy based on surgery may have good survival benefits, and tumour stage is an independent risk factor for the prognosis of pLCNEC.

Morphologic and molecular classification of lung neuroendocrine neoplasms

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) of the lung encompass neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) composed of typical (TC) and atypical (AC) carcinoids and full-fledged carcinomas (NECs) inclusive of large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) and small cell carcinoma (SCLC). NETs and NECs are thought to represent distinct and separate lesions with neither molecular overlap nor common developmental continuum. Two perspectives were addressed regarding the morphologic and molecular classification of lung NENs: (i) a supervised approach by browsing the traditional classification, the relevant gene alterations, and their clinical implications; and (ii) an unsupervised approach, by reappraising neoplasms according to risk factors and natural history of disease to construct an interpretation model relied on biological data. We herein emphasize lights and shadows of the current classification of lung NENs and provide an alternative outlook on these tumors focused on what we currently know about the biological determinants and the natural history of disease.

CDX2 Expression and Prognostic Factors of Resectable Pulmonary Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma

Background and Aim:

Pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) is a rare neoplasm, and its clinical features and management are still limited. We evaluated the clinicopathological factors, including CDX2 immunohistochemical expression, to predict survival in patients with LCNEC.

Patients and Methods:

In all, 50 patients with LCNEC who underwent surgery at 4 institutes between 2001 and 2017 were included. Clinicopathological characteristics were evaluated for prognostic factors and statistically analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curve with a log-rank test or Cox regression models. We used immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis to determine the expressions of CDX2 and compared them with clinicopathological factors and survival.

Results:

Sixteen of the 50 cases (32%) were CDX2 positive. No correlation was found between the CDX2 expression by IHC and clinicopathological factors. Multivariate analysis identified adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] =2.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04-8.16, P = .04) and vascular invasion (HR = 4.35, 95% CI = 1.21-15.63, P = .03) as being associated with a significantly worse rate of recurrence-free survival.

Conclusion:

CDX2 was expressed in 1/3 of LCNEC but not associated with prognostic factor. Adjuvant chemotherapy and vascular invasion were associated with a negative prognostic factor of LCNEC.

Pulmonary Large-Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma: Therapeutic Challenges and Opportunities

Pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (P-LCNEC) is a rare, poorly differentiated, non-small cell malignancy within the spectrum of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) of the lung. Despite sharing several similarities with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in their clinical, immunohistopathological, genomic, and prognostic features, it is a distinct and biologically heterogeneous entity with challenging diagnostic and therapeutic requirements. Given the lack of prospective, randomized data to guide management, it is common practice to pursue thoracic surgery for resectable tumors according to the guidelines for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and implement systemic chemotherapy as early as at stage I, similar to the treatment of SCLC. However, important issues, such as the optimal timing and combination of therapeutic modalities, the most effective type of chemotherapy for advanced-stage disease, and the benefit from prophylactic cranial irradiation, remain debated. Accumulating evidence from retrospective, molecular profiling studies supports the existence of at least two P-LCNEC subtypes, most notably a SCLC-like and a NSCLC-like phenotype, which presumably underlie the observed differential sensitivity to platinum-based regimens and warrant further validation as predictive biomarkers of efficacy. Furthermore, several potentially actionable, driver molecular alterations have been identified, offering implications for personalized treatment approaches, including targeted therapies and immunotherapy. The current review discusses open questions on the diagnosis and management of P-LCNEC, as well as recent advances in its genomic and transcriptomic characterization that create promising therapeutic opportunities.

Stenting in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: How Does It Affect the Outcomes?

OBJECTIVE

Approximately 30% of lung cancer patients develop central airway obstruction (CAO) that remarkably shortens survival. There is little data about the benefits of stenting within this heterogeneous patient group. Our objective was to review their overall survival (OS) and their risk of hospitalization versus patients who did not have lesions requiring stent placement.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed charts of 171 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who underwent bronchoscopy in the University of Cincinnati Cancer Center from the year 2011 to 2013. Twenty-five patients with advanced lung cancer were evaluated by interventional pulmonology service for endobronchial stent placement for CAO. Eight patients did not require placement of a stent and 17 had obstructive lesions that required stenting by interventional pulmonology.

RESULTS

Demographical parameters such as age and gender did not have a significant impact on the risk of hospitalization or OS of both groups of patients, however, those whose lesions did not mandate stent placement had significantly lower odds of hospitalization compared to patients with CAO requiring a stent (OR: 15.913, 95% CI: 1.211-209.068, P = 0.0352). Patients with advanced NSCLC and CAO that required stent placement had an OS of 13.9 m [3.9-19.9 m] compared to an OS of 23.9 m for patients with CAO not requiring a stent. We found out that patients with less severe CAO have lower odds of hospitalization and better OS compared to patients with CAO mandating stent placement.

CONCLUSION

CAO patients with interventional pulmonology (IP) evaluation and management in addition, may have improved OS suggesting that IP consultation might offer both improvement in quality of life and overall survival to patients with advanced NSCLC and CAO. <br />.

Impact of tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and other antidepressants on overall survival of patients with advanced lung cancer from 2004 to 2014: University of Cincinnati experience

Objectives

To evaluate and categorize the survival benefit of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) in lung cancer patients based on systematic computational drug repositioning data.

Methods

Data were retrospectively extracted from the medical records of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients from the University of Cincinnati Cancer Medical Center database. Patients receiving antidepressants during their course of anti-cancer treatment were compared with those without antidepressants. Data were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier survival curves with the log-rank test, and overall survival (OS) was calculated from the date of diagnosis until last follow-up or death.

Results

The median OS at 2 and 5 years for patients on antidepressants was 20.3 months (54.7% and 42%) vs 44.3 months (47.6% and 43.2%), which was not significant. The median OS for patients receiving TCAs, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and other antidepressants was 3.17 months, 31.33 months, and 18.50 months, respectively.

Conclusion

We found no significant survival benefit for TCA use in combination with anti-cancer agents in NSCLC patients.

Papillary renal cell carcinoma: what is missing in research? A case report and a review of literature

The incidence of renal cell carcinomas in adults ranges has been increasing over the past decades in both men and women. Once the incidence was 2.9%, now is reported to have increased to 3%–5% with male predominance according to the most recent reports of cancer statistics. The disease typically describes a group of different histopathological subtypes; the most common is clear cell carcinoma which accounts for 70%–80% of the diagnosed cases, while papillary renal cell carcinoma and chromophobe types represent 20% and 5%, respectively. In 1996, the renal cell carcinomas Heidelberg classification was introduced by Delahunt et al. It divides renal cell tumors into benign and malignant parenchymal neoplasms, excluding Wilm’s tumor and secondary metastases and limiting each subcategory to the most commonly documented genetic abnormalities, if applicable. In this report, we discuss a case of metastatic type I papillary renal cell carcinoma treated with the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor sunitinib and showing marked long-term clinical response. Through this case, we highlight the importance of re-classifying papillary renal cell carcinoma subtypes to prioritize the clinical management of these cases.

Retrospective Study of the Effect of Statins on the Outcome of Lung Cancer Patients, University of Cincinnati Experience

Objectives:

Numerous studies addressed the effect of statin on cancer patients. The aim of this study is to define the effect of statin administration with chemotherapy on the patients’ outcomes.

Methods:

We retrospectively researched the database of the University of Cincinnati cancer to identify lung cancer patients who received statins (S+, n=41) during their treatment in our institute. We also, retrieved data for contemporaneously treated patients who did not receive statins (S-, n=159) as a control arm. Clinico-demographical data and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using Pearson’s Chi-square (χ²) test and Kaplan-Meier survival curves with Log-rank test. Adjustment using Cox proportional hazard ratios (HR) were done based on (age, gender, race and stage) to identify effect of statins on their outcomes.

Results:

The median age for S+ was 64y (IQR; 55-69) and 71.2% of the patients were white. Histopathology was 55.4% and 31.7% for adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, respectively. Fifty-six percent were stage IV in each study arm and the median OS was14.9 m. Median OS was insignificantly lower in S–ve arm (13.7 vs 15.6 months; P=0.652, HR=0.91, 95%CI 0.52-1.57). Our results show that after different types of adjustments, S+ did not show survival advantage (P>0.05) compared to the control arm.

Conclusion:

While showing an increase in overall survival in patients with advanced lung cancer, the results of this study did not reach statistical significance. This could be due for the small sample size of this retrospective study.