Genomic characteristics and clinical significance of CD56+ circulating tumor cells in small cell lung cancer

Circulating tumor cells (CTC) have been studied in various solid tumors but clinical utility of CTC in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) remains unclear. The aim of the CTC-CPC study was to develop an EpCAM-independent CTC isolation method allowing isolation of a broader range of living CTC from SCLC and decipher their genomic and biological characteristics. CTC-CPC is a monocentric prospective non-interventional study including treatment-naïve newly diagnosed SCLC. CD56+ CTC were isolated from whole blood samples, at diagnosis and relapse after first-line treatment and submitted to whole-exome-sequencing (WES). Phenotypic study confirms tumor lineage and tumorigenic properties of isolated cells for the 4 patients analyzed with WES. WES of CD56+ CTC and matched tumor biopsy reveal genomic alteration frequently impaired in SCLC. At diagnosis CD56+ CTC were characterized by a high mutation load, a distinct mutational profile and a unique genomic signature, compared to match tumors biopsies. In addition to classical pathways altered in SCLC, we found new biological processes specifically affected in CD56+ CTC at diagnosis. High numeration of CD56+ CTC (> 7/ml) at diagnosis was associated with ES-SCLC. Comparing CD56+ CTC isolated at diagnosis and relapse, we identify differentially altered oncogenic pathways (e.g. DLL3 or MAPK pathway). We report a versatile method of CD56+ CTC detection in SCLC. Numeration of CD56+ CTC at diagnosis is correlated with disease extension. Isolated CD56+ CTC are tumorigenic and show a distinct mutational profile. We report a minimal gene set as a unique signature of CD56+ CTC and identify new affected biological pathways enriched in EpCAM-independent isolated CTC in SCLC.

Randomized open-label non-comparative multicenter phase II trial of sequential erlotinib and docetaxel versus docetaxel alone in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer after failure of first-line chemotherapy: GFPC 10.02 study

BACKGROUND

Concomitant administration of erlotinib with standard chemotherapy does not appear to improve survival among patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but preliminary studies suggest that sequential administration might be effective.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of second-line sequential administration of erlotinib and docetaxel in advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

In an open-label phase II trial, patients with advanced NSCLC, EGFR wild-type or unknown, PS 0-2, in whom initial cisplatin-based chemotherapy had failed were randomized to sequential erlotinib 150 mg/d (day 2-16)+docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) d1) (arm ED) or docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) d1) alone (arm D) (21-day cycle). The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival rate at 15 weeks (PFS 15). Secondary endpoints included PFS, overall survival (OS), the overall response rate (ORR) and tolerability. Based on a Simon optimal two-stage design, the ED strategy was rejected if the primary endpoint was below 33/66 patients at the end of the two Simon stages.

RESULTS

147 patients were randomized (median age: 60±8 years, PS 0/1/2: 44/83/20 patients; males: 78%). The ED strategy was rejected, with only 18 of 73 patients achieving PFS15 in arm ED at the end of stage 2 and 17 of 74 patients in arm D. In arms ED and D, respectively, median PFS was 2.2 and 2.5 months and median OS was 6.5 and 8.3 months.

CONCLUSION

Sequential erlotinib and docetaxel was not more effective than docetaxel alone as second-line treatment for advanced NSCLC with wild-type or unknown EGFR status.

A multicentre phase II randomised trial of weekly docetaxel/gemcitabine followed by erlotinib on progression, vs the reverse sequence, in elderly patients with advanced non small-cell lung cancer selected with a comprehensive geriatric assessment (the GFPC 0504 study)

BACKGROUND

Elderly cancer patients form a heterogeneous population in which therapeutic decision-making is often difficult. The aim of this randomised phase II trial was to evaluate the feasibility and activity of weekly docetaxel/gemcitabine (DG) followed by erlotinib after progression (arm A) vs erlotinib followed by DG after progression (arm B) in fit elderly patients with advanced non small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Elderly chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were selected after a comprehensive geriatric assessment (socioeconomic, cognitive, depression, ADL and IADL assessments). The primary endpoint was the time to second progression (TTP2). Overall survival (OS), the time to first progression (TTP1) and safety were secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

Between July 2006 and November 2008, 22 centres enrolled 100 patients. TTP2 was 7.5 and 5.8 months in arm A and arm B, respectively; TTP1 was 4.7 and 2.7 months; and the median OS time was 9.4 and 7.1 months; the respective 1-year survival rates were 36.2 and 31.4%. There was no major unexpected toxicity.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that weekly DG, followed by erlotinib, is a promising treatment for fit elderly patients with NSCLC; the efficacy of the reverse sequence was insufficient to recommend it for EGFR-non-selected patients.

[Pain management, let us be simple but efficient]

The occurrence of pain during the course of bronchial carcinoma is nearly inescapable and often constitutes the main symptom for patients and those close to them. While pain control is held to be a priority of care in cancerology in the future, this goal is not always reached due to insufficient implementation of recommendations, however widely accessible. Our aim is to present the different aspects of pain treatment through the details of both pharmacological and nonpharmacological means.

A randomized phase II trial of early change of a chemotherapeutic doublet compared to four cycles of chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): The 03–01 Groupe Francais de Pneumo-Cancerologie (GFPC) study

7631

Background: The optimal strategy in advanced NSCLC with stable disease is not well known. There is no published study assessing an early change of chemotherapeutic drugs in these patients. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of early modification of chemotherapy doublets in patients with advanced non small cell lung cancer with stable disease (SD). Methods: Patients with stage IV NSCLC and measurable disease were included in a randomized phase II trial comparing for patients with stable disease after 2 cycles of a platin (P)-gemcitabine doublet (P d1: 75 mg/m2, gemcitabine 1 250 mg/m2 d1, d8 every three weeks) two subsequent cycles of this doublet (arm A) to a switch to another doublet (arm B): paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 d1, d8, d15, gemcitabine 1 250 mg/m2 d1, d8, every four weeks. Results: Between October 2003 and august 2006, 228 patients (pts) were enrolled (187 males, 41 females), median age 57 y (30–70). Evaluation (EVA) 1 showed 11.8% not assessable patients (NA), 19.3% with objective responses (OR), 25.9% with progressive diseases. 98 patients (43%) had stable diseases. 87 patients were randomized in the study. 48.3% with PS0, 51.7% with PS1 and a majority of adenocarcinoma (62.1%). 41.4% had only one metastatic site. There were no differences between the two groups. Efficacy at eva 2 is depicted above. Overall survival (OS) was similar between the two arms: 9.8 months (m) [7.0 - 14.2] for arm A, 9.2 m [7.4 - 10.5] for arm B. TTP was 5.4 m in arm A and 5.7 in arm B. There were 1 grade III/IV haematological toxicities in arm A (1.2%) and 2 in arm B (2.4%). There were 4 grade III/IV non haematological toxicities in arm A (4.8%) and 6 in arm B (7.3%). Conclusions: The switch between the two regimen is feasible without any major toxicities. Despite higher response rate in favour of the switch strategy, OS and TTP are similar between the two arms.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

[Table: see text]