Current status of second-line treatment and novel therapies for small cell lung cancer

Despite high response rates to first-line standard treatment, the great majority of patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) will relapse and succumb to their disease rather quickly. In the context of salvage therapy, symptom palliation and quality-of-life improvements, besides survival prolongation, are primary treatment endpoints. A variety of single-agent and multi-agent chemotherapy regimens have been tested with limited success in patients with recurrent SCLC. A number of combination regimens have demonstrated high response rates in second-line settings, but these can be considered only for patients with good performance status. Treatment outcome depends on many factors, including type of response to first-line therapy, treatment-free interval, and performance status. Currently, topotecan represents an effective, tolerable therapeutic option and is the only agent approved for this indication. The management of patients with recurrent disease remains an area of active research. This review provides an update of clinical research on second-line chemotherapy of SCLC and of recent results obtained with novel molecular targeted approaches in both first- and second-line therapy.

Limited-stage small-cell lung cancer: the current status of combined-modality therapy

Limited-stage (LS) small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) remains a therapeutic challenge to medical and radiation oncologists. The treatment of LS-SCLC has evolved significantly over the last two decades with combined-modality therapy now the standard of care. The addition of thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) to standard chemotherapy has led to improvements in long-term survival in this population. However, many questions remain about the optimal way to deliver chemoradiotherapy. In a landmark trial, twice-daily TRT to a dose of 45 Gy increased 5-year survival by 10% compared with once-daily TRT administered to the same dose. This suggests that more intensive TRT regimens may lead to further survival gains, assuming they can be delivered safely in this setting. Strategies currently under investigation include higher total daily doses delivered once daily or novel concurrent boost techniques allowing more intensive treatments over shorter periods of time. Several trials and meta-analyses have evaluated the timing of TRT with chemotherapy, with the weight of evidence suggesting that early and concurrent TRT with chemotherapy is optimal. Novel cytotoxic chemotherapy combinations have failed thus far to provide an advantage over standard etoposide-cisplatin combinations. Prophylactic cranial irradiation in near or complete responders to induction chemoradiotherapy has also been shown to improve long-term survival rates. LS-SCLC has been a model cancer in terms of the potential benefit of combined chemoradiotherapy strategies in improving patient outcomes.

Phase II Study of Vandetanib or Placebo in Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients After Complete or Partial Response to Induction Chemotherapy With or Without Radiation Therapy: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Study BR.20

Purpose

This double-blind randomized phase II trial examined whether vandetanib, an inhibitor of vascular endothelial and epidermal growth factor receptors, could prolong progression-free survival in responding patients with small-cell lung cancer.

Patients and Methods

Eligible patients with complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) to combination chemotherapy (± thoracic or prophylactic cranial radiation) received oral vandetanib 300 mg/d or matched placebo. With 100 patients and 77 events, the study had 80% power to detect an improvement in median progression-free survival from 4 to 6.5 months (one-sided, 10%-level test).

Results

Between May 2003 and March 2006, 107 patients were accrued; 46 had limited disease and 61 extensive disease. There were fewer patients with a performance status of 0 (n = 11 v 20), and fewer had CR to initial therapy (n = 4 v 8) in the vandetanib arm. Vandetanib patients had more toxicity and required more dose modifications for gastrointestinal toxicity and rash. Asymptomatic Corrected QT interval (QTC) prolongation was observed in eight vandetanib patients. Median progression-free survival for vandetanib and placebo was 2.7 and 2.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 80% CI, 0.75 to 1.36; one-sided P = .51). Overall survival for vandetanib was 10.6 versus 11.9 months for placebo (HR, 1.43; 80% CI, 1.00 to 2.05; one-sided P = 0.9). In planned subgroup analyses, a significant interaction was noted (P = .01): limited-stage vandetanib patients had longer overall survival (HR, 0.45; one-sided P = .07) and extensive-stage vandetanib patients shorter survival compared with placebo (HR, 2.27; one-sided P = .996).

Conclusion

Vandetanib failed to demonstrate efficacy as maintenance therapy for small-cell lung cancer.

Phase II study of thalidomide in patients with metastatic carcinoid and islet cell tumors

PURPOSE

Carcinoid and islet cell tumors are known to be highly vascular. There is no effective systemic therapy currently available for metastatic disease. We conducted a phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy of the anti-antiangiogenic agent thalidomide in metastatic neuroendocrine tumors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eighteen patients with measurable, histologically proven metastatic carcinoid neuroendocrine carcinomas (well-differentiated, n = 13; moderately-differentiated, n = 5) were enrolled on this study. The majority of the patients had gastrointestinal primaries (small bowel, 8; pancreas, 5; colon, 1). All but one patient had hepatic metastases, and 12 patients (67%) had carcinoid syndrome. All patients had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of zero or one. Eight patients (44%) had received previous hepatic artery chemoembolization and 11 (61%) had undergone surgical resection. Patients were started on oral thalidomide at a daily dose of 200 mg that was escalated to the target dose of 400 mg daily after 2 weeks. Tumor response was assessed at 12-week intervals using RECIST criteria. Planned treatment duration was 24 weeks unless unacceptable toxicity or disease progression was observed.

RESULTS

No patient achieved a partial remission or a complete remission. Best response was stable disease (SD) in 11 of 16 response-evaluable patients (69%). Serum pancreastatin results did not correlate with clinical response. Grade 3 toxicities included dizziness with orthostatic hypotension (n = 5), sensory neuropathy (n = 2), fatigue (n = 2), hemorrhagic cystitis (n = 1), and deep venous thrombosis (n = 1). Frequent Grade 1-2 toxicities were: fatigue (n = 13), constipation (n = 13), dry mouth (n = 12), somnolence (n = 12), dizziness/syncope (n = 10), weight gain (n = 5), and peripheral neuropathy (n = 5).

CONCLUSIONS

Thalidomide was fairly well tolerated in patients with metastatic carcinoid/islet cell tumors, but failed to reveal any objective responses. The single stage design of the trial makes it difficult to determine whether observed SD in a subset of patients was attributable to the indolent nature of these tumors, or to beneficial effect of thalidomide.