Initial chemotherapeutic doses and long-term survival in limited small-cell lung cancer

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.

Small cell lung cancer: new clinical recommendations and current status of biomarker assessment

Small-cell lung carcinomas (SCLC) represent 15-18% of all lung cancers. As SCLC has a high propensity for early metastatic dissemination, less than a third of patients have limited disease (T0-1N0-3M0). The new TNM classification should now be used also for SCLC. Platin- and etoposide-based chemotherapy is the cornerstone treatment. Response rates to both chemotherapy and radiotherapy are impressive but relapses are frequent. The current state-of-the-art treatment for MO patients involves platin-etoposide-based chemotherapy, combined with early thoracic radiotherapy. Because of the high risk of brain metastases, prophylactic cranial irradiation is indicated in responders and should be part of the standard management. The 5-year survival rate may reach 25% in MO patients, but does not exceed 10% at 2 years in metastatic patients. Most patients relapse within the first two years, and there are few treatment options in second line as opposed to NSCLC. Many issues are subject for further clinical research such as the biology of this disease to better identify pathways that could be targeted with new drugs, optimisation of systemic treatments and radiotherapy. Pursuing clinical trials at all stages constitutes a challenge for thoracic researchers and oncologists.

Standard-dose versus higher-dose prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer in complete remission after chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy (PCI 99-01, EORTC 22003-08004, RTOG 0212, and IFCT 99-01): a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The optimum dose of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) for limited-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is unknown. A meta-analysis suggested that the incidence of brain metastases might be reduced with higher PCI doses. This randomised clinical trial compared the effect of standard versus higher PCI doses on the incidence of brain metastases.

METHODS

Between September, 1999, and December, 2005, 720 patients with limited-stage SCLC in complete remission after chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy from 157 centres in 22 countries were randomly assigned to a standard (n=360, 25 Gy in 10 daily fractions of 2.5 Gy) or higher PCI total dose (n=360, 36 Gy) delivered using either conventional (18 daily fractions of 2 Gy) or accelerated hyperfractionated (24 fractions in 16 days with two daily sessions of 1.5 Gy separated by a minimum interval of 6 h) radiotherapy. All of the treatment schedules excluded weekends. Randomisation was stratified according to medical centre, age (</=60 and >60 years), and interval between the start of induction treatment and the date of randomisation (</=90, 91-180, and >180 days). Eligible patients were randomised blindly by the data centre of the Institut Gustave Roussy (PCI99-01 and IFCT) using minimisation, and by the data centres of EORTC (EORTC ROG and LG) and RTOG (for CALGB, ECOG, RTOG, and SWOG), both using block stratification. The primary endpoint was the incidence of brain metastases at 2 years. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00005062.

FINDINGS

Five patients in the standard-dose group and four in the higher-dose group did not receive PCI; nonetheless, all randomised patients were included in the effectiveness anlysis. After a median follow-up of 39 months (range 0-89 months), 145 patients had brain metastases; 82 in the standard-dose group and 63 in the higher-dose group. There was no significant difference in the 2-year incidence of brain metastases between the standard PCI dose group and the higher-dose group, at 29% (95% CI 24-35) and 23% (18-29), respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80 [95% CI 0.57-1.11], p=0.18). 226 patients in the standard-dose group and 252 in the higher-dose group died; 2-year overall survival was 42% (95% CI 37-48) in the standard-dose group and 37% (32-42) in the higher-dose group (HR 1.20 [1.00-1.44]; p=0.05). The lower overall survival in the higher-dose group is probably due to increased cancer-related mortality: 189 patients in the standard group versus 218 in the higher-dose group died of progressive disease. Five serious adverse events occurred in the standard-dose group versus zero in the higher-dose group. The most common acute toxic events were fatigue (106 [30%] patients in the standard-dose group vs 121 [34%] in the higher-dose group), headache (85 [24%] vs 99 [28%]), and nausea or vomiting (80 [23%] vs 101 [28%]).

INTERPRETATION

No significant reduction in the total incidence of brain metastases was observed after higher-dose PCI, but there was a significant increase in mortality. PCI at 25 Gy should remain the standard of care in limited-stage SCLC.

FUNDING

Institut Gustave-Roussy, Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer (2001), Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (2007). The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) contribution to this trial was supported by grants 5U10 CA11488-30 through 5U10 CA011488-38 from the US National Cancer Institute.

Results of a prospective dose-intensive regimen in 27 patients with small cell carcinoma of the ovary of the hypercalcemic type

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of first-line intensive combination therapy in small cell carcinoma of the ovary (SCCO).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Debulking surgery; four to six cycles of chemotherapy with cisplatin (P) 80 mg/m(2) day 1, adriamycin (A) 40 mg/m(2) day 1, vepeside (V) 75 mg/m(2)/day days 1-3, cyclophosphamide (EP) 300 mg/m(2)/day days 1-3, every 3 weeks and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with, in case of a complete remission, high-dose chemotherapy with carboplatin, vepeside, cyclophosphamide and stem-cell support.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients (median age 25 years); International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage: five I, four IIC, 17 IIIC-IV and one unknown. Twenty patients underwent complete surgery. Eight patients progressed under chemotherapy. Among 18 patients in complete response (CR), 10 received high-dose chemotherapy (CT) (three stem-cell collection failures, two protocol violations, two disease progression and one refusal). The main grade 3-4 toxic effects were hematologic. There were eight relapses among the 18 CR, four of which were pelvic alone. Among the 27 patients, 13 died and 10 patients are in CR1, three in CR2. The median follow-up is 37 months (8-166) and the median duration of the 18 CR is 30 months (5-111). Overall survival at 1 and 3 years is 58% [confidence interval (CI) 40% to 75%] and 49% (CI 30% to 67%).

CONCLUSIONS

Initial dose-intensive therapy achieves interesting overall survival in SCCO.

Chemotherapy strategies in the treatment of small cell lung cancer

Lung cancer is the most prevalent, yet most preventable malignancy worldwide. Given the tendency of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) to early relapse and its subsequent resistance to treatment, there is an urgent need to optimize standard treatment strategies and develop new treatments. Over the last decade, several strategies have been adopted and advances in the molecular biology of lung cancer have identified a number of targets for future therapy. In this article, we review chemotherapy strategies that have been evaluated in the management of patients with SCLC.

G-CSF as prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in SCLC

OBJECTIVES

In 1991, small cell lung cancer (SCLC) was reported as the first tumour type where colony stimulating factor (CSF) support was clinically effective. We reviewed 13 health services research studies that addressed CSF use as supportive care for SCLC.

METHODS

Findings from American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) membership surveys, patterns of care studies, ASCO evidence-based guidelines and cost-effectiveness studies for CSF use were reviewed.

RESULTS

For primary prophylaxis for SCLC, ASCO CSF clinical guidelines clearly do not support granulocyte (G)-CSF use. Cost-effectiveness models indicate that CSF use in this setting is associated with as much as US$1900 incremental patient care costs per cycle given an 18% febrile neutropenia rate. ASCO membership surveys found that < 10% of respondents supported CSF as primary prophylaxis while a patterns-of-care study found 55% use. In the secondary prophylaxis setting, ASCO CSF guidelines in 1994, 1996 and 1997 were equally supportive of CSF use versus dose reduction but dose-reduction was considered the preferred option in 2000. Over half of the ASCO member respondents in 1994 and in 1997 supported G-CSF use; cost-effectiveness models indicated that CSF use incurred an additional US$144 and 277 per cycle and the patterns of care study found 27% use of CSF in the community practice setting.

CONCLUSIONS

In 2002, the findings of a decade of health services studies have shifted towards not being supportive of CSF use for primary or secondary prophylaxis for SCLC patients.

Neuroendocrine tumors of the lung: recent developments in histopathology

Lung tumors with neuroendocrine differentiation are made up of several neoplasms with particular epidemiologic, clinical, morphologic, and molecular characteristics. Typical and atypical carcinoid tumors represent low-grade and intermediate-grade carcinomas, respectively, whereas small-cell carcinoma and large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma are considered high-grade carcinomas. Recent studies support the use of this four-tumor, three-tier classification scheme, but in practice, definitive diagnoses on small tissue samples remain a challenge for even the most experienced lung pathologists.