Phase III trial comparing supportive care alone with supportive care with oral topotecan in patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer

RESILIENT Part 2: A Randomized, Open-Label Phase III Study of Liposomal Irinotecan Versus Topotecan in Adults With Relapsed Small Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

The phase III RESILIENT trial compared second-line liposomal irinotecan with topotecan in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with SCLC and progression on or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous (IV) liposomal irinotecan (70 mg/m2 every 2 weeks in a 6-week cycle) or IV topotecan (1.5 mg/m2 daily for 5 consecutive days, every 3 weeks in a 6-week cycle). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Key secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR).

RESULTS

Among 461 randomly assigned patients, 229 received liposomal irinotecan and 232 received topotecan. The median follow-up was 18.4 months. The median OS was 7.9 months with liposomal irinotecan versus 8.3 months with topotecan (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.37]; P = .31). The median PFS per blinded independent central review (BICR) was 4.0 months with liposomal irinotecan and 3.3 months with topotecan (HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.20]; nominal P = .71); ORR per BICR was 44.1% (95% CI, 37.6 to 50.8) and 21.6% (16.4 to 27.4), respectively. Overall, 42.0% and 83.4% of patients receiving liposomal irinotecan and topotecan, respectively, experienced grade ≥3 related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The most common grade ≥3 related TEAEs were diarrhea (13.7%), neutropenia (8.0%), and decreased neutrophil count (4.4%) with liposomal irinotecan and neutropenia (51.6%), anemia (30.9%), and leukopenia (29.1%) with topotecan.

CONCLUSION

Liposomal irinotecan and topotecan demonstrated similar median OS and PFS in patients with relapsed SCLC. Although the primary end point of OS was not met, liposomal irinotecan demonstrated a higher ORR than topotecan. The safety profile of liposomal irinotecan was consistent with its known safety profile; no new safety concerns emerged.

The Evolving Scenario of ES-SCLC Management: From Biology to New Cancer Therapeutics

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive neuroendocrine carcinoma accounting for 15% of lung cancers with dismal survival outcomes. Minimal changes in therapy and prognosis have occurred in SCLC for the past four decades. Recent progress in the treatment of extensive-stage disease (ES-SCLC) has been marked by incorporating immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) into platinum-based chemotherapy, leading to modest improvements. Moreover, few second-line-and-beyond treatment options are currently available. The main limitation for the molecular study of SCLC has been the scarcity of samples, because only very early diseases are treated with surgery and biopsies are not performed when the disease progresses. Despite all these difficulties, in recent years we have come to understand that SCLC is not a homogeneous disease. At the molecular level, in addition to the universal loss of retinoblastoma (RB) and TP53 genes, a recent large molecular study has identified other mutations that could serve as targets for therapy development or patient selection. In recent years, there has also been the identification of new genetic subtypes which have shown us how intertumor heterogeneity exists. Moreover, SCLC can also develop intratumoral heterogeneity linked mainly to the concept of cellular plasticity, mostly due to the development of resistance to therapies. The aim of this review is to quickly present the current standard of care of ES-SCLC, to focus on the molecular landscapes and subtypes of SCLC, subsequently present the most promising therapeutic strategies under investigation, and finally recap the future directions of ongoing clinical trials for this aggressive disease which still remains a challenge.

Sintilimab plus anlotinib as second or further-line therapy for extensive disease small cell lung cancer: a phase 2 investigator-initiated non-randomized controlled trial

Background

Treatment options remain rather limited for extensive disease small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC) patients in second or further-line setting.

Methods

The phase 2 investigator-initiated non-randomized study enrolled patients who had disease progression on at least one line of platinum-based chemotherapy. Participants received intravenous sintilimab 200 mg on day one and oral daily anlotinib 12 mg on days 1-14 once every three weeks per cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and safety. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04055792).

Findings

Forty-two patients were enrolled between August 29, 2019 and December 26, 2021 at Henan Cancer Hospital in China. 37 patients were evaluable for efficacy. The median follow-up was 24.8 months (IQR: 16.9-28.2). The median PFS was 6.1 months (95% CI: 5.0-7.3). The OS was 12.7 months (95% CI: 7.1-18.2). The ORR was 56.8% (21/37, 95% CI: 40.0-73.5) and the DCR was 89.2% (33/37, 95% CI: 78.7-99.7). Forty patients (40/42, 95%) had at least one treatment-related adverse event (TRAE). Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were reported in 39 patients (39/42, 93%), while grade 3 or higher irAEs occurred in 11 patients (11/42, 26%). The most frequent irAEs were hypothyroidism (16/42, 38%), elevated gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (15/42, 36%) and elevated creatine kinase MB (15/42, 36%). The most frequent grade 3 or higher irAEs were elevated gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (5/42, 12%) and increased aspartate aminotransferase (3/42, 7%).

Interpretation

Sintilimab plus anlotinib demonstrated promising antitumor activities as second or further-line therapy for ED-SCLC and had manageable toxicities. The findings support further randomized controlled trials of this combination regimen for ED-SCLC.

Funding

Henan Province Health and Youth Subject Leader Training Project, Henan Health Science and Technology Innovation Talents, ZHONGYUAN QIANREN JIHUA, Henan International Joint Laboratory of drug resistance and reversal of targeted therapy for lung cancer, Tumor Research Fund of Anti-Angiogenesis Targeted Therapy of China Anti-Cancer Association.

Efficacy of second-line chemotherapy in patients with pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma

The efficacy of second-line chemotherapy in patients with pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of second-line chemotherapy in patients with pulmonary LCNEC. We retrospectively reviewed patients with pulmonary LCNEC or possible LCNEC (pLCNEC) who received platinum-based chemotherapy as the first-line treatment. Among these patients, we evaluated the efficacy of second-line treatment by comparing patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC group). Of the 61 patients with LCNEC or pLCNEC (LCNEC group) who received first-line chemotherapy, 39 patients were treated with second-line chemotherapy. Among the 39 patients, 61.5% received amrubicin monotherapy. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the LCNEC groups were 3.3 and 8.3 months, respectively. No significant differences in the PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.924, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.647-1.320; P = 0.664) and OS (HR: 0.926; 95% CI 0.648-1.321; P = 0.670) were observed between the LCNEC and SCLC groups. In patients treated with amrubicin, the PFS (P = 0.964) and OS (P = 0.544) were not different between both the groups. Second-line chemotherapy, including amrubicin, may be considered as a treatment option for patients with pulmonary LCNEC.

Considerations for selecting second-line treatment in patients with progressive small cell lung cancer and the use of Lurbinectedin in this setting

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is characterized by high initial responses to platinum-based chemotherapy plus immune checkpoint inhibitors; however, most patients quickly relapse and require subsequent treatment. Second-line treatment options in SCLC remain limited, and treatment algorithms are not completely consistent across the available guidelines in this setting. This review highlights key considerations regarding selection of second-line treatment for patients with relapsed SCLC. In particular, the role of lurbinectedin, which was first approved in 2020, representing the first significant addition to treatment algorithms in this setting for decades, is summarized. Future directions, including the identification of SCLC subtypes and the need for predictive biomarkers to guide patient selection and targeted therapy, are also discussed.

Lurbinectedin in small cell lung cancer: real-world experience of a multicentre national early access programme

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lurbinectedin is a novel oncogenic transcription inhibitor active in several cancers, including small cell lung cancer (SCLC). We aimed to describe the first Australian experience of the clinical efficacy and tolerability of lurbinectedin for the treatment of SCLC after progression on platinum-containing therapy.

METHODS

Multicentre real-world study of individuals with SCLC initiating lurbinectedin monotherapy (3.2 mg/m2 three-weekly) on an early access programme between May 2020 and December 2021. Key outcomes were clinical utilisation, efficacy and tolerability. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Outcome data were collected within the AUstralian Registry and biObank of thoRacic cAncers (AURORA).

RESULTS

Data were analysed for 46 individuals across seven sites. Lurbinectedin was given as second- (83%, 38/46) or subsequent- (17%, 8/46) line therapy, mostly with prior chemoimmunotherapy (87%, 40/46). We report dose modifications (17%, 8/46), interruptions/delays (24%, 11/46), high-grade toxicities (28%, 13/46) and hospitalisations (54%, 25/46) during active treatment. The overall response rate was 33% and the disease control rate was 50%. Six-month OS was 44% (95% confidence interval (CI): 29.0-57.1). Twelve-month OS was 15% (95% CI: 6.5-26.8). From lurbinectedin first dose, the median PFS was 2.5 months (95% CI: 1.8-2.9) and OS was 4.5 months (95% CI: 3.5-7.2). From SCLC diagnosis, the median OS was 12.9 months (95% CI: 11.0-17.2). Individuals with a longer chemotherapy-free interval prior to lurbinectedin had longer PFS and OS.

CONCLUSION

This real-world national experience of lurbinectedin post-platinum chemotherapy and immunotherapy for individuals with SCLC was similar to that reported in clinical trials.

Biomarker-driven phase 2 umbrella trial: Clinical efficacy of olaparib monotherapy and combination with ceralasertib (AZD6738) in small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Based on a high incidence of genomic alteration in the cell cycle and DNA damage and response (DDR)-related pathways in small cell lung cancer (SCLC), the clinical efficacy of the DDR-targeting agent olaparib (PARP inhibitor) as monotherapy and in combination with ceralasertib (ATR inhibitor) in relapsed or refractory SCLC was evaluated.

METHODS

As part of a phase 2 biomarker driven umbrella study, patients with SCLC and predefined DDR gene alterations who failed to benefit from prior platinum-based regimens were allocated to the olaparib monotherapy arm and nonbiomarker-selected patients were allocated to the olaparib and ceralasertib combination arm.

RESULTS

In the olaparib monotherapy arm (n = 15), the objective response rate was 6.7% (one partial response), and the disease control rate was 33.3%, including three patients with stable disease. The median progression-free survival was 1.3 months (95% CI, 1.2-NA). In the combination arm (n = 26), the objective response rate and disease control rate were 3.8% and 42.3%, respectively, with one partial response and 10 patients with stable disease. The median progression-free survival was 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.8-5.4). Treatment was generally well tolerated except for one fatal case of neutropenic fever in the combination arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Targeting DDR pathways with olaparib as a single agent or in combination with ceralasertib did not meet the predefined efficacy end point. However, disease stabilization was more evident in the combination arm. Further investigation of the combination of olaparib in SCLC should be performed with diverse combinations and patient selection strategies to maximize efficacy.

Lurbinectedin in patients with small cell lung cancer with chemotherapy-free interval ≥30 days and without central nervous metastases

OBJECTIVES

This report focuses on lurbinectedin activity and safety in a subgroup of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients from a Basket phase 2 study (Trigo et al. Lancet Oncology 2020;21:645-654) with chemotherapy-free interval (CTFI) ≥ 30 days. This pre-planned analysis was requested for obtaining regulatory approval of lurbinectedin in Switzerland.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with extensive-stage SCLC, no central nervous system (CNS) metastases, and disease progression after platinum-containing therapy were included. Topotecan data from a contemporary, randomized, controlled phase 3 study (ATLANTIS) were used as indirect external control in a matched patient population (n = 98 patients).

RESULTS

Lurbinectedin showed a statistically significant higher overall response rate (ORR) by investigator assessment (IA) compared to topotecan subgroup (41.0 % vs. 25.5 %; p = 0.0382); higher ORR by Independent Review Committee (IRC) (33.7 % vs. 25.5 %); longer median duration of response (IA: 5.3 vs. 3.9 months; IRC: 5.1 vs. 4.3 months), and longer median overall survival (10.2 vs. 7.6 months). Grade ≥ 3 hematological abnormalities were remarkably lower with lurbinectedin: anemia 12.0 % vs. 54.1 %; leukopenia 30.1 % vs. 68.4 %; neutropenia 47.0 % vs. 75.5 %, and thrombocytopenia 6.0 % vs. 52.0 %. Febrile neutropenia was observed at a higher incidence with topotecan (6.1 % vs. 2.4 % with lurbinectedin) despite that the use of growth-colony stimulating factors was mandatory with topotecan.

CONCLUSION

With the limitations of an indirect comparison, however using recent and comparable SCLC datasets, this post hoc analysis shows that SCLC patients with CTFI ≥ 30 days and no CNS metastases have a positive benefit/risk ratio with lurbinectedin, superior to that observed with topotecan.

Changes in Intestinal Flora and Serum Metabolites Pre- and Post-Antitumor Drug Therapy in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

OBJECTIVE

this study aimed to identify the relationships between gut microbiota, metabolism, and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment outcomes, which are presently unclear.

METHODS

in this single-center prospective cohort study, we investigated changes in the gut microbiota and serum metabolite profile in 60 patients with NSCLC after four cycles of anticancer therapy.

RESULTS

The microbial landscape of the gut exhibited a surge in Proteobacteria and Verrucomicrobiota populations, alongside a decline in Firmicutes, Actinobacteriota, and Bacteroidota. Furthermore, a significant shift in the prevalence of certain bacterial genera was noted, with an increase in Escherichia/Shigella and Klebsiella, contrasted by a reduction in Bifidobacterium. Metabolomic analysis uncovered significant changes in lipid abundances, with certain metabolic pathways markedly altered post-treatment. Correlation assessments identified strong links between certain gut microbial genera and serum metabolite concentrations. Despite these findings, a subgroup analysis delineating patient responses to therapy revealed no significant shifts in the gut microbiome's composition after four cycles of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study emphasizes the critical role of gut microbiota changes in NSCLC patients during anticancer treatment. These insights pave the way for managing treatment complications and inform future research to improve patient care by understanding and addressing these microbiota changes.

Review of real-world experience with lurbinectedin in relapsed/refractory small cell lung cancer

Lurbinectedin, a novel antineoplastic agent, was granted the orphan drug designation by the United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) and approved for use in relapsed/refractory small cell lung cancer in June 2020. The approval was granted after its efficacy was demonstrated in a multicenter open-label, multi-cohort study enrolling 105 participants. Since then, real-world studies have examined the efficacy and safety profiles of lurbinectedin in clinical practice. By examining these outcomes, this review aims to provide clinicians with the tools necessary to make informed clinical decisions.

Second-Line Treatment Options for Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Light at the End of the Tunnel

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a subtype of lung tumor characterized by rapid growth and early metastatic dissemination. It represents approximately 15% of all diagnosed lung cancers, with an annual incidence of over 200,000 cases worldwide. At the time of initial diagnosis, approximately 75-80% of patients already have extrathoracic spread. Almost all patients with SCLC also relapse after achieving a complete response with first-line treatment. Outcomes achievable in second-line treatment are related to the length of time between completion of first-line therapy and disease progression. While first-line chemo-immunotherapy remains the standard of care for initial management, the role of second-line treatment strategies in SCLC has been a topic of significant research and discussion. Second-line treatment options are limited and the results are still disappointing. Several molecules are currently being studied in lines following the first, using immunological targets and cell cycle checkpoints. Among these, particular interest has been placed on anti-PD-1 (programmed cell death-1 protein) and anti-PD-L1 (programmed cell death-ligand 1) monoclonal antibodies, and DLL3 (Delta-like ligand 3), which are being evaluated alone or in combination. Tarlatamab is a novel promising therapeutic antibody currently under investigation for its potential use in previously treated SCLC patients. This mini-review will explore the current state of second-line treatment options for SCLC, their clinical efficacy, and future directions.

Treating patients with platinum-sensitive extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer in a real-world setting

Extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) is an aggressive disease with poor 5-year survival. The first-line standard-of-care for ES-SCLC is platinum plus etoposide, along with 1 of the immune checkpoint inhibitors atezolizumab or durvalumab. Although SCLC first-line therapy often leads to rapid responses, treatment becomes more challenging at progression, particularly for those with a chemotherapy-free interval (CTFI) of ≤6 months. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) for SCLC no longer specify treatment recommendations in this setting, but options approved by the US Food and Drug Administration include topotecan and lurbinectedin. Participation in a clinical trial is recommended as an option regardless of CTFI. Other NCCN-recommended regimens are paclitaxel, irinotecan, temozolomide, and cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine, among others. Nivolumab and pembrolizumab are options in those not previously treated with a checkpoint inhibitor. For patients with platinum-sensitive SCLC (CTFI >6 months), preferred treatment per the NCCN Guidelines® for SCLC is retreatment with platinum and etoposide, although the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors is discouraged if there is progression on a drug in this class. Further research on immunotherapies and combination regimens is ongoing, and continuing work on the subcharacterization of SCLC may lead to better precision of therapies that promote more durable responses in individual patients with ES-SCLC.

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.

Development and Validation of txSim: A Model of Advanced Lung Cancer Treatment in Australia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Since 2016, new therapies have transformed the standard of care for lung cancer, creating a need for up-to-date evidence for health economic modelling. We developed a discrete event simulation of advanced lung cancer treatment to provide estimates of survival outcomes and healthcare costs in the Australian setting that can be updated as new therapies are introduced.

METHODS

Treatment for advanced lung cancer was modelled under a clinician-specified treatment algorithm for Australia in 2022. Prevalence of lung cancer subpopulations was extracted from cBioPortal and the Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study, a large prospective cohort linked to cancer registrations. All costs were from the health system perspective for the year 2020. Pharmaceutical and molecular diagnostic costs were obtained from public reimbursement fees, while other healthcare costs were obtained from health system costs in the 45 and Up Study. Treatment efficacy was obtained from clinical trials and observational study data. Costs and survival were modelled over a 10-year horizon. Uncertainty intervals were generated with probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Overall survival predictions were validated against real-world studies.

RESULTS

Under the 2022 treatment algorithm, estimated mean survival and costs for advanced lung cancer 10 years post-diagnosis were 16.4 months (95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 14.7-18.1) and AU$116,069 (95% UI: $107,378-$124,933). Survival and costs were higher assuming optimal treatment utilisation rates (20.5 months, 95% UI: 19.1-22.5; $154,299, 95% UI: $146,499-$161,591). The model performed well in validation, with good agreement between predicted and observed survival in real-world studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival improvements for advanced lung cancer have been accompanied by growing treatment costs. The estimates reported here can be used for budget planning and economic evaluations of interventions across the spectrum of cancer control.

Selection of Chemotherapy in Advanced Poorly Differentiated Extra-Pulmonary Neuroendocrine Carcinoma

Extra-pulmonary poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma is rare, and evidence for treatment has been limited. In this article, the evidence behind the cytotoxic chemotherapy choices used for metastatic or unresectable EP-PD-NEC is reviewed. In the first-line setting, etoposide and platinum chemotherapy or irinotecan and platinum have been demonstrated to be equivalent in a large phase III trial. Questions remain regarding the optimal number of cycles, mode of delivery, and the precise definition of platinum resistance in this setting. In the second-line setting, FOLFIRI has emerged as an option, with randomized phase 2 trials demonstrating modest, but significant, response rates. Beyond this, data are extremely limited, and several regimens have been used. Heterogeneity in biological behaviour is a major barrier to optimal EP-PD-NEC management. Available data support the potential role of the Ki-67 index as a predictive biomarker for chemotherapy response. A more personalised approach to management in future studies will be essential, and comprehensive multi-omic approaches are required to understand tumour somatic genetic changes in relation to their effects on the surrounding microenvironment.

[Prevention, Diagnosis, Therapy, and Follow-up of Lung Cancer - Interdisciplinary Guideline of the German Respiratory Society and the German Cancer Society - Abridged Version]

The current S3 Lung Cancer Guidelines are edited with fundamental changes to the previous edition based on the dynamic influx of information to this field:The recommendations include de novo a mandatory case presentation for all patients with lung cancer in a multidisciplinary tumor board before initiation of treatment, furthermore CT-Screening for asymptomatic patients at risk (after federal approval), recommendations for incidental lung nodule management , molecular testing of all NSCLC independent of subtypes, EGFR-mutations in resectable early stage lung cancer in relapsed or recurrent disease, adjuvant TKI-therapy in the presence of common EGFR-mutations, adjuvant consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibitors in resected lung cancer with PD-L1 ≥ 50%, obligatory evaluation of PD-L1-status, consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibition after radiochemotherapy in patients with PD-L1-pos. tumor, adjuvant consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibition in patients withPD-L1 ≥ 50% stage IIIA and treatment options in PD-L1 ≥ 50% tumors independent of PD-L1status and targeted therapy and treatment option immune chemotherapy in first line SCLC patients.Based on the current dynamic status of information in this field and the turnaround time required to implement new options, a transformation to a "living guideline" was proposed.

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.

SEOM-GECP Clinical guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) (2022)

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly aggressive malignancy comprising approximately 15% of lung cancers. Only one-third of patients are diagnosed at limited-stage (LS). Surgical resection can be curative in early stages, followed by platinum-etoposide adjuvant therapy, although only a minority of patients with SCLC qualify for surgery. Concurrent chemo-radiotherapy is the standard of care for LS-SCLC that is not surgically resectable, followed by prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) for patients without progression. For extensive-stage (ES)-SCLC, a combination of platinum and etoposide has historically been a mainstay of treatment. Recently, the efficacy of programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy has become the new front-line standard of care for ES-SCLC. Emerging knowledge regarding SCLC biology, including genomic characterization and molecular subtyping, and new treatment approaches will potentially lead to advances in SCLC patient care.

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.

In-Vivo Somatostatin-Receptor Expression in Small Cell Lung Cancer as a Prognostic Image Biomarker and Therapeutic Target

BACKGROUND

Given the dismal prognosis of small cell lung cancer (SCLC), novel therapeutic targets are urgently needed. We aimed to evaluate whether SSTR expression, as assessed by positron emission tomography (PET), can be applied as a prognostic image biomarker and determined subjects eligible for peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT).

METHODS

A total of 67 patients (26 females; age, 41-80 years) with advanced SCLC underwent SSTR-directed PET/computed tomography (somatostatin receptor imaging, SRI). SRI-avid tumor burden was quantified by maximum standardized uptake values (SUV_max) and tumor-to-liver ratios (T/L) of the most intense SCLC lesion. Scan findings were correlated with progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). In addition, subjects eligible for SSTR-directed radioligand therapy were identified, and treatment outcome and toxicity profile were recorded.

RESULTS

On a patient basis, 36/67 (53.7%) subjects presented with mainly SSTR-positive SCLC lesions (>50% lesions positive); in 10/67 patients (14.9%), all lesions were positive. The median SUV_max was found to be 8.5, while the median T/L was 1.12. SRI-uptake was not associated with PFS or OS, respectively (SUV_max vs. PFS, ρ = 0.13 with p = 0.30 and vs. OS, ρ = 0.00 with p = 0.97; T/L vs. PFS, ρ = 0.07 with p = 0.58 and vs. OS, ρ = -0.05 with p = 0.70). PRRT was performed in 14 patients. One patient succumbed to treatment-independent infectious complications immediately after PRRT. In the remaining 13 subjects, disease control was achieved in 5/13 (38.5%) with a single patient achieving a partial response (stable disease in the remainder). In the sub-group of responding patients, PFS and OS were 357 days and 480 days, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SSTR expression as detected by SRI is not predictive of outcome in patients with advanced SCLC. However, it might serve as a therapeutic target in selected patients.

FOLFIRI in advanced platinum-resistant/refractory small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) accounts for approximately 15% of lung cancer and is associated with poor prognosis. In platinum-refractory or -resistant SCLC patients, few treatment options are available. Topotecan is one of the standards of care for these patients, however, due to its high toxicity, several different approaches are employed. FOLFIRI (folinate, 5-fluorouracil and irinotecan) is a chemotherapy regimen used in digestive neuroendocrine carcinoma, which shares pathological similarities with SCLC. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of FOLFIRI in patients with platinum-resistant/refractory SCLC.

METHODS

Medical records from all consecutive SCLC patients treated with FOLFIRI in a French University Hospital from 2013 to 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate according to RECIST v1.1 or EORTC criteria (ORR); secondary endpoints included duration of response, disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety profile.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients with metastatic platinum-resistant (n = 14) or -refractory (n = 20) SCLC were included. Twenty-eight were evaluable for response, with a partial response observed in 5 patients for an overall ORR in the evaluable population of 17.9% (5/28) and 14.7% (5/34) in the overall population. The disease control rate was 50% (14/28) in the evaluable population. The median PFS and OS were 2.8 months (95%CI, 2.0-5.2 months) and 5.3 months (95%CI, 3.5-8.9 months), respectively. All patients were included in the safety analysis. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 13 (38.2%) patients. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were asthenia, neutropenia, thrombopenia and diarrhea. There was no adverse event leading to discontinuation or death.

CONCLUSION

FOLFIRI showed some activity for platinum-resistant/refractory SCLC in terms of overall response and had an acceptable safety profile. However, caution is needed in interpreting this result. FOLFIRI could represent a potential new treatment for platinum-resistant/refractory SCLC patients. Further prospective studies are needed to assess the benefits of this chemotherapy regimen.HIGHLIGHTSFOLFIRI showed some activity for platinum-resistant/refractory SCLC in terms of overall response.FOLFIRI was well-tolerated in platinum resistant/refractory SLCL patients.FOLFIRI could represent a potential new treatment for SCLC, prospective studies are needed.

Novel therapeutic strategies for recurrent SCLC

Therapeutic options for patients with relapsed SCLC are limited, and the prognosis in this setting remains poor. While clinical outcomes for frontline treatment have modestly improved with the introduction of immunotherapy, treatment in the second-line setting persists almost unchanged. In this review, current treatment options and recent advances in molecular biology are described. Emerging therapeutic options in this setting and potential strategies to improve clinical outcomes of these patients are also addressed.

Small-Cell Lung Cancer-An Update on Targeted and Immunotherapies

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive disease with distinct biological and clinical features. The clinical course of SCLC is generally characterised by initial sensitivity to DNA-damaging therapies, followed by early relapse and broad cross resistance to second line agents. Whilst there has been an enormous expansion of effective targeted and immune-based therapeutic options for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the last decade, little improvement has been achieved in SCLC treatment and survival due, at least in part, to underappreciated inter- and intra-tumoral heterogeneity. Here we review the current treatment paradigm of SCLC including recent advances made in utilizing immunotherapy and the challenges of identifying a predictive biomarker for immunotherapy response. We examine emerging new targeted therapies, combination immunotherapy and future directions of SCLC treatment research.

Indirect treatment comparison of lurbinectedin versus other second-line treatments for small-cell lung cancer

Aim: Compare lurbinectedin versus other second-line (2L) small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) treatments. Methods: An unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison connected the platinum-sensitive SCLC cohort of a single-arm lurbinectedin trial to a network of three randomized controlled trials (oral and intravenous [IV] topotecan, and platinum re-challenge) identified by systematic literature review. Network meta-analysis methods estimated relative treatment effects. Results: In platinum-sensitive patients, lurbinectedin demonstrated a survival benefit and favorable safety profile versus oral and IV topotecan and platinum re-challenge (overall survival, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.43; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.27, 0.67; HR: 0.43; 95% CrI: 0.26, 0.70; HR: 0.42; 95% CrI: 0.30, 0.58 respectively). Conclusion: Lurbinectedin showed a robust survival benefit and favorable safety versus other SCLC treatments in 2L platinum-sensitive SCLC.

Impact of nab-paclitaxel plus PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor on chemorefractory relapsed small-cell lung cancer

Background: The present study evaluated the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel (nab-PTX) with a concurrent PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor in patients with refractory relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Patients & methods: We retrospectively analyzed 240 patients with refractory relapsed SCLC: 40 patients were treated with nab-PTX plus PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor, and 200 received traditional chemotherapy. Results: Median progression-free survival in the nab-PTX plus PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor and traditional chemotherapy groups was 3.6 and 2.5 months (p = 0.0021), respectively. The median overall survival was 8.0 and 5.2 months (p = 0.0002), respectively. No new safety issues were identified. Conclusion: Nab-PTX plus PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor significantly improved survival in patients with refractory relapsed SCLC compared with traditional chemotherapy.

Precise prediction of the sensitivity of platinum chemotherapy in SCLC: Establishing and verifying the feasibility of a CT-based radiomics nomogram

Objectives

To develop and validate a CT-based radiomics nomogram that can provide individualized pretreatment prediction of the response to platinum treatment in small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

Materials

A total of 134 SCLC patients who were treated with platinum as a first-line therapy were eligible for this study, including 51 patients with platinum resistance (PR) and 83 patients with platinum sensitivity (PS). The variance threshold, SelectKBest, and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) were applied for feature selection and model construction. The selected texture features were calculated to obtain the radiomics score (Rad-score), and the predictive nomogram model was composed of the Rad-score and the clinical features selected by multivariate analysis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curves were used to assess the performance of the nomogram.

Results

The Rad-score was calculated using 10 radiomic features, and the resulting radiomics signature demonstrated good discrimination in both the training set (area under the curve [AUC], 0.727; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.627–0.809) and the validation set (AUC, 0.723; 95% CI, 0.562–0.799). To improve diagnostic effectiveness, the Rad-score created a novel prediction nomogram by combining CA125 and CA72-4. The radiomics nomogram showed good calibration and discrimination in the training set (AUC, 0.900; 95% CI, 0.844-0.947) and the validation set (AUC, 0.838; 95% CI, 0.534-0.735). The radiomics nomogram proved to be clinically beneficial based on decision curve analysis.

Conclusion

We developed and validated a radiomics nomogram model for predicting the response to platinum in SCLC patients. The outcomes of this model can provide useful suggestions for the development of tailored and customized second-line chemotherapy regimens.

Current and Emerging Treatment Options for Patients With Relapsed Small-cell Lung Carcinoma: A Systematic Literature Review

Second-line treatment options are limited for patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). We conducted a PRISMA-standard systematic literature review to evaluate the treatment landscape for patients with relapsed SCLC (PROSPERO number: CRD42022299759). Systematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were performed (October 2022) to identify publications (prior 5 years) from prospective studies of therapies for relapsed SCLC. Publications were screened against predetermined eligibility criteria; data were extracted to standardized fields. Publication quality was assessed using GRADE. The data were analyzed descriptively, grouped by drug class. Overall, 77 publications involving 6349 patients were included. Studies of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with established cancer indications accounted for 24 publications; topoisomerase I inhibitors for 15; checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) for 11, and alkylating agents for 9 publications. The remaining 18 publications featured chemotherapies, small-molecule inhibitors, investigational TKIs and monoclonal antibodies, and a cancer vaccine. According to GRADE assessment, 69% of the publications reported low-/very-low-quality evidence; quality limitations included lack of randomization and small sample sizes. Only 6 publications/6 trials reported phase 3 data; 5 publications/2 trials reported phase 2/3 results. Overall, the clinical potential of alkylating agents and CPIs remained unclear; investigations of combination approaches and biomarker-directed usage are warranted. Phase 2 data from TKI trials were consistently promising; no phase 3 data were available. Phase 2 data for a liposomal formulation of irinotecan were promising. We confirmed an absence of promising investigational drug/regimens in late-stage development; thus, relapsed SCLC remains an area of high unmet need.

Rare thoracic cancers: a comprehensive overview of diagnosis and management of small cell lung cancer, malignant pleural mesothelioma and thymic epithelial tumours

Despite the progress in outcomes seen with immunotherapy in various malignancies, including nonsmall cell lung cancer, the benefits are less in small cell lung cancer, malignant pleural mesothelioma and thymic epithelial tumours. New effective treatment options are needed, guided via more in-depth insights into the pathophysiology of these rare malignancies. This review comprehensively presents an overview of the clinical presentation, diagnostic tools, staging systems, pathophysiology and treatment options for these rare thoracic cancers. In addition, opportunities for further improvement of therapies are discussed.

Real World Patient Eligibility for Second Line Lurbinectedin Based Treatment in Small Cell Lung Cancer: Understanding Epidemiology and Estimating Health Care Utilization

BACKGROUND

In the ATLANTIS study, second-line lurbinectedin/doxorubicin did not improve overall survival (OS), however patients with a chemotherapy-free interval (CTFI) of ≥180 days had an improved progression free survival (PFS). The objective of this retrospective study was to identify the proportion of real-world small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients who are suitable for lurbinectedin-based therapy based on these criteria.

METHODS

A retrospective study of all SCLC referred to BC Cancer between 2012 and 2017 was conducted. Patient demographics, staging, treatment, and survival data were collected retrospectively. Baseline characteristics were compared using descriptive statistics. OS was calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Statistically significant p-value was <0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 1048 patients were identified. Baseline characteristics: median age 68 years, 47% male, 61% current smoking status, 68% extensive disease. Best supportive care was received by 22%. First-line systemic therapy was platinum doublet for 71% of the population. Second-line systemic therapy was delivered to 22%. Of the 219 patients who received second-line systemic therapy after platinum doublet, 183 patients had a CTFI of ≥90 days and 107 patients had a CTFI of ≥180 days. Patients originally treated as limited stage disease, received platinum doublet as second line, received thoracic radiation (RT) or prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) were more likely to have a CTFI of ≥90 and ≥180 days.

CONCLUSION

In our real-world SCLC population, only 21% of the SCLC population received second-line therapy after platinum doublet with 17% achieving CTFI of ≥90 days and 10% CTFI of ≥180 days. Based on this retrospective review, only a small fraction of platinum-treated patients would be preferentially offered lurbinectedin in the second-line setting.

Recent advances in small cell lung cancer: the future is now?

Small cell lung cancer is a relevant clinical issue as it is a highly malignant cancer, often diagnosed in advanced stage. Similarly to non-small cell lung cancer, tobacco smoking is currently the main risk factor. Its incidence, at least in males, has declined over the past decades, due to the worldwide decreased percentage of active smokers. The typical small cells of this tumor type are characterized by a high Proliferation Index, chromosomal deletions such as 3p(14-23) involving the tumor-suppressor gene FHIT, alterations of the MYC or Notch family proteins and the frequent expression of neuroendocrine markers. The combination of thoracic radiotherapy and chemotherapy is the standard treatment for limited stage disease, while platinum-based chemotherapy is the most effective choice for extensive stage disease. Unfortunately, whatever chemotherapy is used, the results are disappointing. No regimen has proved to be effective in the long run, indeed small cell lung cancer rapidly progresses after a frequent initial strong response, and the mortality rate remains still high. The advent of immunotherapy is actually changing the landscape in oncology. As well as in other cancers, recent trials have demonstrated the efficacy of the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapy, opening new perspectives for the future of our patients.

MicroRNA signature of small-cell lung cancer after treatment failure: impact on oncogenic targets by miR-30a-3p control

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is associated with a high mortality rate and limited treatment efficacy. We created a microRNA (miRNA) expression signature by RNA sequencing using specimens from patients with SCLC who had failed treatment. Forty-nine miRNAs were downregulated in SCLC tissues and were candidate tumor-suppressive miRNAs. In this signature, both guide and passenger strands were downregulated for five miRNAs (miR-30a, miR-34b, miR-34c, miR-223, and miR-4529). Recent studies have revealed that passenger strands of miRNAs are involved in the molecular pathogenesis of human cancer. Although miR-30a-5p (the guide strand) has been shown to be a tumor-suppressive miRNA in various types of cancers, miR-30a-3p (the passenger strand) function is not well characterized in SCLC cells. We investigated the functional significance of miR-30a-3p and oncogenic genes regulated by miR-30a-3p in SCLC cells. Ectopic expression assays showed that miR-30a-3p expression inhibited cell proliferation and induced cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in two SCLC cell lines. Furthermore, in silico database searches and gene expression assays identified 25 genes as putative targets of miR-30a-3p in SCLC cells. Luciferase reporter assays revealed that downstream neighbor of SON (DONSON) was directly regulated by miR-30a-3p in SCLC cells. Knockdown of DONSON induced cell cycle arrest in SCLC cells and DONSON overexpression were detected in SCLC clinical samples. Analyzing the regulatory networks of tumor-suppressive miRNAs may lead to the identification of therapeutic targets in SCLC.

Clinical efficacy of amrubicin in patients with small cell lung cancer relapse after first-line treatment including immune checkpoint inhibitors: A retrospective multicenter study (TOPGAN 2021-01)

BACKGROUND

The therapeutic efficacy of cytotoxic anticancer drugs has been reported to be enhanced after immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in non-small cell lung cancer; however, it is unclear whether the same is applicable for small cell lung cancer (SCLC). We evaluated the efficacy of second-line amrubicin (AMR) following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and ICI combination therapy (chemo-ICI) in SCLC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled consecutive patients with SCLC treated with AMR as a second-line following chemo-ICI as first-line between July 2019 and April 2021 from 16 institutions throughout Japan. We investigated the therapeutic effectiveness, safety, and efficacy-enhancing variables of AMR.

RESULTS

Overall, 89 patients treated with AMR after first-line chemo-ICI were analyzed. The overall response rate (ORR) was 29.2% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 20.1-39.8) and median PFS (m PFS) was 2.99 months (95% CI, 2.27-3.65). Patients who relapsed more than 90 days after receiving first-line platinum combination therapy (sensitive relapse) exhibited greater ORR (58.3% vs. 24.7%, p = 0.035) and m PFS (5.03 vs. 2.56 months, p = 0.019) than patients who relapsed in <90 days (refractory relapse). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were mainly hematological toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggested that the therapeutic effect of AMR was not enhanced after ICI on SCLC. However, AMR may be effective in cases of sensitive relapse after chemo-ICI. There was no increase in severe toxicity associated with AMR after ICI.

Large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the gynecologic tract: Prevalence, survival outcomes, and associated factors

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess the clinical behavior of gynecologic large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) via a retrospective analysis of data from 469 patients.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with gynecologic LCNEC from 1988 to 2015 were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Univariate and multivariate Cox hazard regression analyses were performed to assess independent predictors of overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). OS and CSS were also evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the effects of different treatment regimens on prognosis were compared according to disease stage.

RESULTS

Cervical, ovarian, and endometrial LCNEC were observed in 169, 219, and 79 patients, respectively. The 5-year OS rates for patients with cervical, ovarian, and endometrial LCNEC were 35.98%, 17.84%, and 23.21%, respectively, and the median duration of overall survival was 26, 11, and 11 months in each group. The 5-year CSS rates for the three groups were 45.23%, 19.23%, and 31.39%, respectively, and the median duration of CSS was 41, 12, and 11 months in each group. Multivariate analysis revealed that American Joint Committee on Cancer stage, lymph node metastasis, and chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors for OS and CSS in patients with cervical LCNEC. Lymph node metastasis, surgery, and chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors for OS and CSS in the ovarian group and for OS in the endometrial group. Lymph node metastasis and surgery were also independent prognostic factors for CSS in the endometrial group.

CONCLUSION

Surgery alone may help to improve overall survival and CSS in patients with early-stage cervical LCNEC. In contrast, surgery+chemotherapy and surgery+radiotherapy may help to improve survival in those with early-stage ovarian and endometrial LCNEC, respectively. Regardless of subtype, comprehensive treatment involving surgery, CTX, and RT should be considered to improve prognosis in patients with advanced-stage gynecologic LCNEC.

The Impact of Chemosensitivity on the Outcome of Brain Metastases in Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the prognostic differences between patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) with different chemosensitivity to first-line chemotherapy who developed brain metastasis (BM) as the first site of progression.

METHODS

Patients with a BM after first-line treatment in the Tianjin Cancer Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. According to the time-free interval (TFI) between the completion of first-line chemotherapy and the onset of the BM, the patients were divided into the chemo-sensitive group (TFI ≥ 90 days, n = 145) and the chemo-resistant group (TFI < 90 days, n = 97). The survival time, which was calculated from the diagnosis of the BM, was analyzed after the onset of brain metastasis (BM-OS). Survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method, and differences between groups were compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

In total, the median BM-OS was 8.4 months. The median BM-OS in the chemo-sensitive group was 8.8 months, and it was 8.0 months in the chemo-resistant group (p = 0.538). In patients without extracranial progression (n = 193), the median BM-OSes in the chemo-sensitive and chemo-resistant groups were 9.4 months and 9.7 months, respectively (p = 0.947). In patients with extracranial progression (n = 49), the median BM-OSes in the chemo-sensitive and chemo-resistant groups were 5.4 months and 4.2 months, respectively (p = 0.161). Conclusions: After the development of a BM as the first site of progression following chemotherapy in patients with SCLC, the prognosis of chemo-sensitive patients was not necessarily superior to chemo-resistant patients, especially in patients without extracranial progression.

Feasibility and safety of platinum-doublet therapy in patients with small-cell lung cancer in the third-line setting: A multi-institutional retrospective study

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly malignant tumor, and no standard third-line therapy has been established. The present study retrospectively analyzed the efficacy and safety of platinum-based regimens in patients with third-line SCLC who received third-line chemotherapy. The association of regimen type with overall survival (OS) or time to treatment failure (TTF) was evaluated using the Cox hazard proportional method, including well-known covariates affecting the prognosis of SCLC. TTF and OS analyses were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method. The data cutoff date was June 30, 2020. As a result, from January 2015 to August 2019, 111 patients were diagnosed with SCLC, and 37 received third-line chemotherapy. Subsequently, 15 patients received a platinum-doublet regimen, and 22 patients received a single-agent regimen. Only the type of regimen was significantly associated with TTF in univariate analysis (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.95; P=0.03). There were no significant factors associated with OS. The median TTF of patients receiving a platinum-doublet regimen and those receiving a single-agent regimen were 3.9 and 2.3 months, respectively (P=0.03). The overall response rates of the platinum-doublet and single-agent regimens were 20.0 and 4.5%, respectively. Similarly, the disease control rates were 73.3 and 36.4% for platinum-doublet and single-agent regimens, respectively. There was a tendency for adverse events (AEs) with any grade to occur more often in platinum-based regimens compared with in single-agent regimens. Severe AEs of grade 3 or higher were observed more often in the platinum-based regimen, especially in myelosuppression. In conclusion, the present study demonstrated the feasibility and safety of platinum-doublet regimens in patients with SCLC in a third-line setting (Registration no. 2020-048. Date of registration, June 5, 2020).

Lurbinectedin in small cell lung cancer

Few treatment options are available for patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in progression after a first-line therapy. A novel therapeutic approach is represented by lurbinectedin, a synthetic derivative of trabectedin that works by inhibiting oncogenic transcription and promoting apoptosis in tumor cells. A phase II basket trial demonstrated the activity of lurbinectedin at the dose of 3.2 mg/m² in patients with SCLC who had failed a previous chemotherapy, with a response rate of 35.2%, a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 3.5 months, and a median overall survival (mOS) of 9.3 months. Common severe adverse events (grades 3–4) were hematological disorders, including anemia (9%), leukopenia (29%), neutropenia (46%), and thrombocytopenia (7%). On the basis of the positive results of this phase II study, on June 2020, lurbinectedin was approved by the Food and Drug Administration as second line for SCLC patients in progression on or after platinum-based therapy. The subsequent phase III trial comparing the combination of lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin vs. CAV (cyclophosphamide, Adriamycin, and vincristine) or topotecan did not demonstrate an improvement in overall survival, although the experimental arm showed a superior safety profile. Combinations of lurbinectedin with other drugs, cytotoxic agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors, are currently under investigation. The results of these studies should better define the optimal clinical application of lurbinectedin.

Real-life second-line epirubicin-paclitaxel regimen as treatment of relapsed small-cell lung cancer: EpiTax study

BACKGROUND

Few therapeutic options are approved as second-line treatment after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy for patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Topotecan widespread use remains challenged by the risk of severe toxicities in a pretreated population. Little is known about the efficacy and safety of epirubicin-paclitaxel doublet in second-line and beyond and especially cerebral outcomes.

METHODS

EpiTax is a retrospective multicenter observational real-life study. We evaluated the efficacy of epirubicin 90 mg/m² combined with paclitaxel 175 mg/m² every 3 weeks in SCLC patients after failure of at least one line of platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), intracranial control rate (ICR), and safety.

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients were included. The median of previous systemic therapy lines was 2 (1-4). Eleven patients received the treatment in the second line. Characteristics of patients were a median age of 60 years (45-77), 65.5% of males with 72.4% of PS 0-1. Fifteen patients had a history of brain metastases. Median PFS and OS achieved 11.0 (95% CI, 8.1-16.3) and 23 (95% CI, 14.1-29.6) weeks, respectively. ORR was 34.5% and DCR was 55.2%. ICR was 3/15 (20%). Grade 3-4 adverse events were mainly hematological and concerned 7 patients. No case of febrile neutropenia or toxic death was reported.

CONCLUSION

Epirubicin-paclitaxel association highlighted promising efficacy with PFS and OS of 11 and 23 weeks, respectively, ORR of 34.5%, and a tolerable safety profile. This doublet could represent another valuable therapeutic option for ES-SCLC patients treated in the second line and beyond.

New perspectives in the management of small cell lung cancer

The treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a challenge for all specialists involved. New treatments have been added to the therapeutic armamentarium in recent months, but efforts must continue to improve both survival and quality of life. Advances in surgery and radiotherapy have resulted in prolonged survival times and fewer complications, while more careful patient selection has led to increased staging accuracy. Developments in the field of systemic therapy have resulted in changes to clinical guidelines and the management of patients with advanced disease, mainly with the introduction of immunotherapy. In this article, we describe recent improvements in the management of patients with SCLC, review current treatments, and discuss future lines of research.

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.

Advanced age is not the decisive factor in chemotherapy of small cell lung cancer: a population-based study

OBJECTIVE

There is limited research on the impact of chemotherapy on the prognosis of different age group patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). The aim of this study was to explore the impact of chemotherapy on survival prognosis of elderly patients with SCLC.

METHODS

Based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database, 57,460 SCLC patients between 2004 and 2015 were identified and divided into a ≤ 80 years group (n = 50,941) and a >80 years group (n = 6,519). Confounding factors were controlled by propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. Kaplan Meier (KM) analysis was performed to determine the impact of chemotherapy on overall survival (OS) and lung-cancer specific survival (LCSS) of the patients. Other variables that could affect survival of SCLC patients were also examined by COX analysis.

RESULTS

KM analysis showed that both OS and LCSS were improved in chemotherapy group compared to those in non-chemotherapy group (log rank P < 0.001) in both age groups after PSM. Cox analysis demonstrated the survival benefit of chemotherapy in both ≤ 80 years group (OS: HR 0.435; 95% CI 0.424-0.447; LCSS: HR 0.436; 95% CI 0.424-0.448) and >80 years group (OS: HR 0.424; 95% CI 0.397-0.451; LCSS: HR 0.415; 95% CI 0.389-0.444). Additionally, the following parameters had a negative impact on survival of elderly patients: male sex, tumor location in main bronchus, increased stage, bilateral tumor, no surgery or radiation, and lower median household income.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients with SCLC should be encouraged to receive chemotherapy provided their general conditions permit.

Tolerability, safety, and preliminary antitumor activity of fuzuloparib in combination with SHR-1316 in patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer: a multicenter, open-label, two-stage, phase Ib trial

Background

Second-line treatment options for small cell lung cancer (SCLC) are limited. Preclinical research shows that inhibition of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) could upregulate programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), and thus render cancer cells more sensitive to immune checkpoint inhibitors. This study investigated the tolerability, safety, and preliminary antitumor activity of fuzuloparib (a PARP inhibitor) plus SHR-1316 (a PD-L1 inhibitor) for relapsed SCLC.

Methods

Patients with SCLC who failed previous first-line platinum-based therapy were enrolled in this two-stage phase Ib trial. In stage 1, 2 dose levels were designed: fuzuloparib 100 mg or 150 mg twice daily plus SHR-1316 600 mg every 2 weeks, with 6 patients in each dose level. Based on the tolerability during the first 28-day cycle and the preliminary antitumor activity in stage 1, a recommended phase II dose (RP2D) was determined and introduced in the stage 2 expansion phase. The primary endpoints were safety and RP2D in stage 1 and objective response rate (ORR) in stage 2.

Results

A total of 23 patients were enrolled, with 16 receiving fuzuloparib 100 mg plus SHR-1316 and 7 receiving fuzuloparib 150 mg plus SHR-1316. At data cutoff on April 23, 2021, the median follow-up duration was 6.4 months (IQR, 3.0–9.7 months). All patients discontinued study treatment. One patient receiving fuzuloparib 150 mg plus SHR-1316 had clinically significant toxicities, and fuzuloparib 100 mg plus SHR-1316 was considered as the RP2D. In the RP2D cohort, the confirmed ORR was 6.3% (95% CI: 0.2–30.2%), and the disease control rate was 37.5% (95% CI: 15.2–64.6%). The median progression-free survival was 1.4 months (95% CI: 1.3–2.8 months), and the median overall survival was 5.6 months (95% CI: 3.0–16.7 months). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) occurred in 8 patients (34.8%). No treatment-related death occurred, and no patients discontinued treatment due to TRAEs.

Conclusions

Fuzuloparib combined with SHR-1316 failed to improve the outcomes in unselected patients with relapsed SCLC. Future studies with biomarker analysis are warranted to select patients most likely to benefit from this combination treatment. Fuzuloparib 100 and 150 mg plus SHR-1316 were both tolerable with no new signals observed.

Oncological Treatment-Related Fatigue in Oncogeriatrics: A Scoping Review

Simple Summary

Fatigue in older patients has multiple etiologies, as this symptom may be cancer-related, treatment-related, age-related, or part of frailty syndrome. Physicians need to identify this symptom and understand its risk factors but also evaluate the risk/benefit ratio of cancer treatments considering the risk of impairing the patient’s quality of life. This scoping review was aimed to present the level of information currently available on any-grade fatigue and grade 3 or more fatigue for each cancer treatment regimen, either in general or in older populations, for the most prevalent tumors.

Abstract

Fatigue is a highly prevalent symptom in both cancer patients and the older population, and it contributes to quality-of-life impairment. Cancer treatment-related fatigue should thus be included in the risk/benefit assessment when introducing any treatment, but tools are lacking to a priori estimate such risk. This scoping review was designed to report the current evidence regarding the frequency of fatigue for the different treatment regimens proposed for the main cancer indications, with a specific focus on age-specific data, for the following tumors: breast, ovary, prostate, urothelium, colon, lung and lymphoma. Fatigue was most frequently reported using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE) versions 3 to 5. A total of 324 regimens were analyzed; data on fatigue were available for 217 (67%) of them, and data specific to older patients were available for 35 (11%) of them; recent pivotal trials have generally reported more fatigue grades than older studies, illustrating increasing concern over time. This scoping review presents an easy-to-understand summary that is expected to provide helpful information for shared decisions with patients regarding the anticipation and prevention of fatigue during each cancer treatment.

Carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel for recurrent small cell lung cancer: A phase II study

Background

We conducted a phase II study of carboplatin plus nab‐paclitaxel for the treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) after the failure of a prior standard chemotherapy containing platinum, etoposide, irinotecan, and amrubicin if indicated. Patients with interstitial pneumonia complications were included in the study.

Methods

Patients received 100 mg/m² of nab‐paclitaxel weekly (on days 1, 8, and 15) and an AUC 5 of carboplatin on day 1. The study treatment was repeated every 3 weeks until disease progression or the appearance of unacceptable toxicities. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate.

Results

A total of 21 patients were enrolled, all of whom were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. Twelve patients had pre‐existing interstitial pneumonia. The overall response rate was 19.0% (90% confidence interval [CI]: 6.8%–38.4%). The lower limit of the 90% CI for the response rate did not exceed the prespecified threshold value of 10%. Among the 12 patients with pre‐existing interstitial pneumonia, the response rate was 25%. The median progression‐free survival time was 2.5 months (95% CI: 1.5–3.4 months), and the median survival time was 5.1 months (95% CI: 2.1–8.1 months). Two patients developed interstitial lung disease; both of these patients had pre‐existing interstitial pneumonia. One of the patients died from interstitial lung disease.

Conclusion

Combination chemotherapy with carboplatin plus nab‐paclitaxel for recurrent SCLC had a modest activity, although the primary study endpoint was not met. Further investigation of this regimen for patients with recurrent SCLC and interstitial pneumonia is warranted.

RESILIENT part 1: A phase 2 dose-exploration and dose-expansion study of second-line liposomal irinotecan in adults with small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

RESILIENT (NCT03088813) is a phase 2/3 study assessing the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of liposomal irinotecan monotherapy in patients with small cell lung cancer and disease progression on/after first-line platinum-based therapy. Here, we present results from RESILIENT part 1.

METHODS

This open-label, single-arm, safety run-in evaluation with dose-exploration and dose-expansion phases included patients ≥18 years old with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0/1; those with asymptomatic central nervous system metastases were eligible. The primary objectives were to evaluate safety and tolerability and recommend a dose for further development. Efficacy end points were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

During dose exploration, 5 patients received intravenous liposomal irinotecan at 85 mg/m² (deemed not tolerable; dose-limiting toxicity) and 12 patients received 70 mg/m² (deemed tolerable). During dose expansion, 13 additional patients received intravenous liposomal irinotecan at 70 mg/m² . Of these 25 patients (median age [range], 59.0 [48.0-73.0] years, 92.0% with metastatic disease), 10 experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), most commonly diarrhea (20.0%) and neutropenia (16.0%), and 3 had serious treatment-related TEAEs, of whom 2 died. ORR was 44.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 24.40-65.07; 1 complete response, 10 partial responses) and median (95% CI) PFS and OS were 3.98 (1.45-4.24) months and 8.08 (5.16-9.82) months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Overall, no new safety signals were identified with liposomal irinotecan, and antitumor activity was promising. RESILIENT part 2, a randomized, controlled, phase 3 study of liposomal irinotecan versus topotecan, is ongoing.

LAY SUMMARY

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive disease with few treatment options after platinum-based therapy. Administering 1 option, irinotecan, as a "liposomal" formulation, may extend drug exposure and improve outcomes. The RESILIENT part 1 trial assessed the safety and efficacy of liposomal irinotecan in 25 adults with SCLC after disease progression despite platinum-based therapy. No new safety concerns were reported. The most common moderate-to-severe side effects were diarrhea (20% of patients) and neutropenia (16%). Tumors responded to treatment in 44% of patients. Average survival was 8.08 months, and time to disease progression was 3.98 months. Liposomal irinotecan trials are ongoing.

Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: First-Line and Second-Line Treatment Options

Extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer is a therapeutically challenging disease. After more than two decades without clinical progress, the addition of programmed cell death protein 1 axis blockade to platinum-based chemotherapy has demonstrated sustained overall survival benefit and represents the current standard of care in the first-line setting. Despite this benefit, resistance emerges relatively rapidly in virtually all patients. Although newer treatments are being incorporated in the relapse setting, marked therapeutic resistance is typically observed in patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), underscoring the need of developing more effective therapies in this setting. Notably, recent progress in the understanding of the molecular biology of SCLC might bring possibilities toward molecularly informed therapeutic strategies for patients with SCLC, which could have a significant impact for improving outcomes in this disease. Here, we review current treatment options and recent progress made in the first-line and relapsed SCLC, including the role of biomarkers and new evolving therapeutic strategies.

Therapeutic Modalities in Small Cell Lung Cancer: a paradigm shift after decades of quiescence

INTRODUCTION

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is known to be the most aggressive of all thoracic malignancies, notoriously known for its very poor prognosis. Platinum based chemotherapy has been the standard of care for decades. Despite years of research, no treatment novelties with significant impact on survival have been achieved until recently. The last few years have witnessed light at the end of the tunnel with immunotherapy proving to improve survival. Nevertheless, responses were not homogeneous in all subgroups, and finding who would best benefit from treatment remains unanswered. Multiple limitations exist, and the quest for optimal biomarkers seemed unfruitful until the discovery of different SCLC phenotypes.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors briefly discuss SCLC phenotypes and biomarker assays. Then, the authors continue with the main trials of SCLC treatment using chemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted treatment in the front-line or subsequent line settings.

EXPERT OPINION

Research has been extensively implemented to better understand the biology of SCLC, and test for the optimal use of immunotherapy in patients with SCLC, as well as to enhance responses via possible combinations. Targeted mechanisms of action have also been attempted; yet no solid proof of efficacy has been established.

Weekly nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel and paclitaxel for relapsed small cell lung cancer: A retrospective observational study

In addition to advanced non-small cell lung cancer, nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-PTX) may also harbor potential benefit for patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC), since weekly paclitaxel (PTX) shows modest activity for relapsed SCLC. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of both weekly nab-PTX and PTX for relapsed SCLC.We retrospectively reviewed 52 consecutive relapsed SCLC patients who were treated with weekly nab-PTX or PTX at our hospital.The response rate, median progression-free survival and overall survival with nab-PTX and PTX were 5.6 vs 8.8%, 3.2 vs 1.7 months, and 5.4 vs 4.5 months, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed. There was no statistical difference between the 2 groups for ≥Grade 3 adverse events.Weekly nab-PTX and PTX showed similar activity for relapsed SCLC. The toxicity profile of nab-PTX was equally tolerable to that of PTX.

Study protocol for a randomised trial evaluating the non-inferiority of stepped palliative care versus early integrated palliative care for patients with advanced lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

Integrating palliative care (PC) early in the illness course for patients with serious cancers improves their outcomes and is recommended by national organisations such as the American Society of Clinical Oncology. However, monthly visits with PC clinicians from the time of diagnosis can be challenging to implement due to the lack of specialty-trained PC clinicians and resources. Therefore, we developed a stepped care model to triage PC service based on patients' needs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We are conducting a non-blinded, randomised trial to evaluate the non-inferiority of a stepped PC model compared with an early integrated PC model for improving patients' quality of life (QOL) at 24 weeks (primary outcome). Patients assigned to early integrated PC meet with PC every 4 weeks throughout their illness. Patients assigned to stepped PC have PC visits only at clinically significant points in their illness (eg, cancer progression) unless their QOL decreases, at which time they are 'stepped up' and meet with PC every 4 weeks throughout the remainder of their illness. Secondary aims include assessing whether stepped PC is non-inferior to early integrated PC regarding patient-clinician communication about end of life care and length of stay on hospice as well as comparing resource utilisation. Patients are recruited from the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Duke Cancer Center, Durham, North Carolina and University of Pennsylvania Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The target sample size is 510 patients.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study is funded by the National Cancer Institute, approved by the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center Institutional Review Board and will be reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. We will disseminate results through professional society meetings, peer-reviewed publications and presentations to patient organisations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03337399.