The Influence of the Evolution of First-Line Chemotherapy on Steadily Improving Survival in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Clinical Trials

Over the past three decades, survival in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) clinical trials has doubled with an increase in 1-year survival from 25% to 50 to 55%. This has been mainly attributed to improvements in systemic therapy. Although modern first-line chemotherapy regimens have more favorable toxicity profiles, a statistically significant improvement in overall survival has not been demonstrated in existing meta-analyses of second-generation versus third-generation combinations. Moreover, pivotal trials demonstrating statistically significant survival superiority of third-generation regimens are consistently not reproducible even for nonsquamous populations using pemetrexed-platinum combinations. As enhancement in the efficacy of first-line systemic therapy in patients without identifiable driver mutations is questionable, other factors are discussed that explain the doubling of 1-year survival reported in clinical trials. These factors include second-line or third-line therapy, maintenance chemotherapy, performance status selection, stage migration, sex migration, improved treatment of brain metastases, and better palliative care.

SABR for aggressive local therapy of metastatic cancer: A new paradigm for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

Metastectomy has been performed for many years in situations where the functional consequences allow it, for example in the liver, lung, adrenal glands, and ovaries. This history suggests that selected patients may benefit from aggressive treatment of metastases. Technological developments now allow for ablative treatment of other tumor sites and perhaps for larger volume and/or increasing multiplicity of disease using Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy (SABR) with relatively lower risk of morbidity to patients. Here we further explore the concept of aggressive local treatment of metastatic disease in adult patients and review the rationale for use of SABR to treat metastases and highlight new data supporting this approach in metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

New radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy approaches for non-small-cell lung cancer

Recent advances in systemic cytotoxic and molecularly targeted therapies coupled with technologic strides in radiotherapy have the potential to improve outcomes for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Investigations are ongoing to identify optimal cytotoxin-based chemoradiotherapy platforms. The influence of specific histologic and molecular mutation status on the combination of targeted therapies and radiotherapy is also being actively studied. Although there are no convincing randomized phase III data to date supporting a survival advantage for combining molecularly targeted agents with radiation or chemoradiotherapy in the setting of locally advanced NSCLC, phase II and III studies targeted to elderly patients and those with poor performance status are elucidating preferred chemoradiotherapy strategies. Radiotherapy dose escalation did not improve chemoradiotherapy outcomes, although increasing radiation dose-intensity with modern techniques is being actively studied. As modern radiotherapy techniques have been shown to improve outcomes of some patients with limited metastatic disease, investigations are ongoing regarding how to optimally integrate them with standard chemotherapy platforms.

A systematic review of the interobserver variability for histology in the differentiation between squamous and nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

The importance of identifying non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) histologic subtype has increased recently because of the development of target-specific chemotherapeutic agents. This systematic review was undertaken to examine the interobserver variability for histology in differentiating between subtypes of NSCLC, specifically the ability to differentiate squamous from nonsquamous histology.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was undertaken to identify studies that evaluated the reproducibility of histologic diagnosis by pathologists in their reporting of NSCLC subtypes. Studies were screened using a priori defined eligibility criteria. The National Health and Medical Research Council diagnostic levels of evidence were applied and quality assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. Data were extracted and reanalyzed to permit comparison of agreement in nonsquamous and squamous cell carcinoma by 2 × 2 tables. Percentage agreement and kappa statistics were calculated for each included study.

RESULTS

Out of 1480 articles identified through the literature search, six were eligible for inclusion. The percentage agreement for all subtypes of NSCLC in the included studies ranged from 67.1 to 89.6% (κ, 0.42-0.84). Based on the primary reanalysis of data (reanalysis 1), agreement between pathologists in differentiating nonsquamous and squamous histology ranged from 77.0 to 94.2% (κ = 0.48-0.88) indicating a moderate to high level of agreement.

CONCLUSION

The reasonably high agreement and kappa statistics for the included studies suggest that pathologists can reproducibly differentiate between nonsquamous and squamous NSCLC. This is clinically important in guiding oncologist decision making in choosing the most appropriate therapy for their patients.

Concomitant chemoradiotherapy using pemetrexed and carboplatin for unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): preliminary results of a phase II study

BACKGROUND

Concomitant chemoradiotherapy is the standard treatment of unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the optimal chemotherapy regimen is still controversial. We have conducted a phase II clinical trial in a Chinese population to evaluate concomitant treatment using pemetrexed/carboplatin chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy followed by pemetrexed/carboplatin consolidation chemotherapy in these patients. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and activity, and also assess its impact on progression-free survival (PFS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 21 patients were enrolled between January 2008 and October 2009. Patients received concomitant pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2), carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 5 chemotherapy on day 1 repeated every 3 weeks for 2 cycles and thoracic radiotherapy, followed by pemetrexed/carboplatin for 3 cycles as consolidation therapy. Objective response rate according to the RECIST criteria was recorded and toxicity was evaluated using the NCI Common Toxicity Criteria. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate patient survival. Univariate analysis of patient characteristics and tumor responses was conducted using the Chi-square and Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Five (23.8%) and 13 patients (61.9%) had a complete or partial response, respectively, while 2 patient's disease remained stable and 1 patient had progression of the disease. The overall response rate (85.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 61-97%) exceeded the goal per study design. The median PFS was 12.0 months (95% CI: 10.6-13.4 months). The statistical analysis of predictive factors of efficacy revealed that the response rate and PFS seemed to a trend favoring adenocarcinoma histology. Main toxicity (grade 3 or greater, %): neutropenia 6 (28.5%); thrombocytopenia 4 (19%); anaemia 5 (23.8%); nausea/vomiting 1 (4.8%); anorexia 1 (4.8%), dysphagia 2 (9.5%), radiation pneumonitis 1 (4.8%) and fatigue 2 (9.5%).

CONCLUSION

This data suggests that concomitant treatment with pemetrexed/carboplatin at full systemic doses and thoracic radiotherapy was well tolerated, with promising activity in a Chinese population with unresectable stage III NSCLC. Better outcomes were observed in patients with adenocarcinoma in this study. Although the data presented herewith appears promising, this study is relatively small, and more data from randomized trials are needed to further validate this regimen.

Recent advances in lung cancer: summary of presentations from the 45th annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (2009)

Over the past decade, gradual progress has been made in improving the outcomes of patients with lung cancer. This review summarizes the findings from selected studies presented at the recently concluded 45th annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. This report will focus only on findings that are of immediate relevance to clinical practice. The topics discussed here range from the long-term safety of adjuvant chemotherapy and a new systemic chemotherapy regimen for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer to the emerging issue of maintenance chemotherapy and the use of biomarkers in the treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

First-line systemic chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) frequently presents at an incurable stage, and a majority of patients will be considered for palliative chemotherapy at some point in their disease. This article reviews the growing evidence for first-line treatment in NSCLC.

METHODS

Studies of first-line chemotherapy regimens including new agents (docetaxel, gemcitabine, irinotecan, paclitaxel, pemetrexed, and vinorelbine) and targeted agents (bevacizumab, erlotinib, and gefitinib) were identified through Medline, Embase, the Cochrane databases, and web sites of guideline organizations.

RESULTS

Two evidence-based guidelines, 10 systematic reviews, and forty-six randomized trials were eligible for inclusion. Randomized studies suggest that platinum-based doublets (platinum plus new agent) are the standard of care for first-line systemic therapy. No one new agent is clearly superior for use in combination with a platinum agent. The survival advantage of platinum-based doublets over nonplatinum combinations or older combinations is modest. The addition of bevacizumab to carboplatin and paclitaxel has shown improved survival, although multiple exclusion criteria limit the applicability of these data to a subset of patients. In patients at least 70 years of age or with Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group performance status 2, a new single agent is an alternative. Treatment beyond four to six cycles impedes quality of life without prolonging life. Emerging data suggest that the choice of chemotherapy agent may be influenced by histologic subtype.

CONCLUSION

In NSCLC, a combination of a platinum agent plus a new agent continues to be the standard of care. As differences between regimens are small, toxicity and patient preference should help guide regimen choice.

Treatment rationale and study design for a phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus best supportive care immediately following induction treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

To improve the efficacy of first-line therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), additional maintenance chemotherapy may be given after initial induction chemotherapy in patients who did not progress during the initial treatment, rather than waiting for disease progression to administer second-line treatment. Maintenance therapy may consist of an agent that either was or was not present in the induction regimen. The antifolate pemetrexed is efficacious in combination with cisplatin for first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC and has shown efficacy as a maintenance agent in studies in which it was not included in the induction regimen. We designed a phase III study to determine if pemetrexed maintenance therapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) after cisplatin/pemetrexed induction therapy in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. Furthermore, since evidence suggests expression levels of thymidylate synthase, the primary target of pemetrexed, may be associated with responsiveness to pemetrexed, translational research will address whether thymidylate synthase expression correlates with efficacy outcomes of pemetrexed.

METHODS/DESIGN

Approximately 900 patients will receive four cycles of induction chemotherapy consisting of pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and cisplatin (75 mg/m2) on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 who have not progressed during induction therapy will randomly receive (in a 2:1 ratio) one of two double-blind maintenance regimens: pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 21-day cycle) plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. The primary objective is to compare PFS between treatment arms. Secondary objectives include a fully powered analysis of OS, objective tumor response rate, patient-reported outcomes, resource utilization, and toxicity. Tumor specimens for translational research will be obtained from consenting patients before induction treatment, with a second biopsy performed in eligible patients following the induction phase.

DISCUSSION

Although using a drug as maintenance therapy that was not used in the induction regimen exposes patients to an agent with a different mechanism of action, evidence suggests that continued use of an agent present in the induction regimen as maintenance therapy enables the identification of patients most likely to benefit from maintenance treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

TRIAL REGISTRY

Clinicaltrials.gov

REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00789373 TRIAL ABBREVIATION: H3E-EW-S124.

Efficacy differences of pemetrexed by histology in pretreated patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer: review of results from an open-label randomized phase II study

INTRODUCTION

Recent pivotal phase III studies in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consistently showed greater survival benefit of pemetrexed in patients with nonsquamous cell carcinoma histology (nonsquamous histology) compared with those with squamous cell carcinoma histology (squamous histology). To confirm the efficacy differences of pemetrexed by histologic type, we conducted an additional subgroup analysis of data from a Japanese randomized phase II study evaluating the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 (P500) and 1000 mg/m2 (P1000) in patients with advanced NSCLC previously treated with chemotherapy. The efficacy and safety results of original phase II study have already been reported (Ohe et al., Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:4206-4212).

METHODS

Objective response rates (ORRs), overall survival time, and progression-free survival time were analyzed by subgroup of histology, squamous, and nonsquamous, for the dose groups combined and separately.

RESULTS

A total of 216 patients were evaluable for efficacy. One hundred sixty-eight patients had nonsquamous and 48 had squamous histology. ORRs were 20.8% and 2.1% (p < 0.001); median survival times (MST) were 16.0 and 8.5 months (p < 0.001); and median progression-free survival times (PFS) were 3.1 and 1.6 months (p < 0.001) for nonsquamous and squamous histology, respectively. In patients who were randomized to the P500 group, ORR were 23.5% and 0% (p = 0.0062); MST were 19.4 and 7.9 months (p < 0.001); and PFS were 3.1 and 1.4 months (p < 0.001) for nonsquamous and squamous histology, respectively. In patients who were randomized to the P1000 group, ORR were 18.1% and 4.0% (p = 0.1113); MST were 13.5 months and 8.6 months (p = 0.0971); and PFS were 3.1 and 1.7 months (p = 0.0024) for nonsquamous and squamous histology, respectively. There were no clinically relevant differences in the incidence of toxicities between histology groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed the difference of pemetrexed efficacy by histologic type, and this result supports the treatment-by-histology effect observed in the past pivotal phase III studies. Higher dose of pemetrexed resulted in similar outcomes both in patients with nonsquamous histology and squamous histology. Pemetrexed is not as effective as alternative therapies for previously treated squamous histology; however, pemetrexed should be the key agent for the treatment of patients with nonsquamous histology.

Reinforcement learning design for cancer clinical trials

We develop reinforcement learning trials for discovering individualized treatment regimens for life-threatening diseases such as cancer. A temporal-difference learning method called Q-learning is utilized that involves learning an optimal policy from a single training set of finite longitudinal patient trajectories. Approximating the Q-function with time-indexed parameters can be achieved by using support vector regression or extremely randomized trees. Within this framework, we demonstrate that the procedure can extract optimal strategies directly from clinical data without relying on the identification of any accurate mathematical models, unlike approaches based on adaptive design. We show that reinforcement learning has tremendous potential in clinical research because it can select actions that improve outcomes by taking into account delayed effects even when the relationship between actions and outcomes is not fully known. To support our claims, the methodology's practical utility is illustrated in a simulation analysis. In the immediate future, we will apply this general strategy to studying and identifying new treatments for advanced metastatic stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer, which usually includes multiple lines of chemotherapy treatment. Moreover, there is significant potential of the proposed methodology for developing personalized treatment strategies in other cancers, in cystic fibrosis, and in other life-threatening diseases.

Histologic considerations for individualized systemic therapy approaches for the management of non-small cell lung cancer

Over the past 5 to 10 years, we have reached a treatment plateau using standard platinum-based doublets in an unselected population of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Recent studies have focused on improving patient outcomes with new chemotherapeutic or targeted agents, as well as on individualizing therapy on the basis of patient characteristics such as tumor histology and biomarker analysis. This article summarizes recent data on histologic response determinants to chemotherapy and targeted therapy, with particular attention to the importance of standardized tissue collection, handling, storage, and analysis techniques, in order to best apply the results of tumor analysis to patient-care decisions. Such decisions are related to both improving patient safety and optimizing efficacy with standard chemotherapy as well as newer targeted therapy agents. This entails a change from a generalized approach in treating patients with NSCLC to an individualized strategy based on tumor histology.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline update on chemotherapy for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer

The purpose of this article is to provide updated recommendations for the treatment of patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer. A literature search identified relevant randomized trials published since 2002. The scope of the guideline was narrowed to chemotherapy and biologic therapy. An Update Committee reviewed the literature and made updated recommendations. One hundred sixty-two publications met the inclusion criteria. Recommendations were based on treatment strategies that improve overall survival. Treatments that improve only progression-free survival prompted scrutiny of toxicity and quality of life. For first-line therapy in patients with performance status of 0 or 1, a platinum-based two-drug combination of cytotoxic drugs is recommended. Nonplatinum cytotoxic doublets are acceptable for patients with contraindications to platinum therapy. For patients with performance status of 2, a single cytotoxic drug is sufficient. Stop first-line cytotoxic chemotherapy at disease progression or after four cycles in patients who are not responding to treatment. Stop two-drug cytotoxic chemotherapy at six cycles even in patients who are responding to therapy. The first-line use of gefitinib may be recommended for patients with known epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation; for negative or unknown EGFR mutation status, cytotoxic chemotherapy is preferred. Bevacizumab is recommended with carboplatin-paclitaxel, except for patients with certain clinical characteristics. Cetuximab is recommended with cisplatin-vinorelbine for patients with EGFR-positive tumors by immunohistochemistry. Docetaxel, erlotinib, gefitinib, or pemetrexed is recommended as second-line therapy. Erlotinib is recommended as third-line therapy for patients who have not received prior erlotinib or gefitinib. Data are insufficient to recommend the routine third-line use of cytotoxic drugs. Data are insufficient to recommend routine use of molecular markers to select chemotherapy.

A phase II study of amrubicin, a synthetic 9-aminoanthracycline, in patients with previously treated lung cancer

PURPOSE

This study was designed to confirm the efficacy and safety of amrubicin, a new anthracycline agent, in patients with previously treated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

METHODS

Eligible patients were required to have recurrent or refractory NSCLC and SCLC after one or two previous chemotherapy regimens. All patients received intravenous amrubicin 35 mg/m(2) on days 1-3 every 3 weeks. Overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients (37 NSCLC and 29 SCLC) were assessable for efficacy and safety evaluation. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was observed in 39.4% of all patients (NSCLC, 37.8%; SCLC, 41.4%). Nonhematological toxicities were mild. No treatment-related death was observed. The ORRs were 13.5% (95% CI, 4.5-28.8%) in NSCLC and 44.8% (95% CI, 26.4-64.3%) in SCLC. In SCLC, ORRs were 60.0% in the sensitive relapse and 36.8% in the refractory relapse (p=0.2332). In NSCLC, the PFS, OS, and 1-year survival were 3.3 months, 12.0 months, and 35.3%, respectively. In SCLC, the PFS, OS, and 1-year survival were 4.0 months, 12.0 months, and 46.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Amrubicin is an active and well-tolerated regimen in patients with previously treated lung cancer. Amrubicin 35 mg/m(2) seems to achieve similar efficacy with less toxicity than amrubicin 40 mg/m(2) in this patient population. These results warrant further evaluation in previously treated lung cancer.

Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of thalidomide in combination with gemcitabine and Carboplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

Cancers rely on angiogenesis for their growth and dissemination. We hypothesized that thalidomide, an oral antiangiogenic agent, when combined with chemotherapy, and as maintenance treatment, would improve survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seven hundred twenty-two patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo or thalidomide capsules 100 to 200 mg daily for up to 2 years. All patients received gemcitabine and carboplatin every 3 weeks for up to four cycles. End points were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, grade 3/4 toxicity, and quality of life (QoL).

RESULTS

The median OS rates were 8.9 months (placebo) and 8.5 months (thalidomide). The hazard ratio (HR) was 1.13 (95% CI, 0.97 to 1.32; P = .12). The 2-year survival rate was 16% and 12% in the placebo and thalidomide arms, respectively. The PFS results were consistent with those for OS. The risk of having a thrombotic event was increased by 74% in the thalidomide group: HR of 1.74 (95% CI, 1.20 to 2.52; P = .003). There were no differences in hematologic toxicities, but a slight excess of rash and neuropathy in the thalidomide group. QoL scores were similar but thalidomide was associated with less insomnia, and more constipation and peripheral neuropathy. In a retrospective analysis, patients with nonsquamous histology in the thalidomide group had a poorer survival: 2-year risk difference of 10% (95% CI, 4% to 16%; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In this large trial of patients with NSCLC, thalidomide in combination with chemotherapy did not improve survival overall, but increased the risk of thrombotic events. Unexpectedly, survival was significantly worse in patients with nonsquamous histology.

Randomized, placebo-controlled, phase II study of sequential erlotinib and chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

This study investigated whether sequential administration of erlotinib and chemotherapy improves clinical outcomes versus chemotherapy alone in unselected, chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Previously untreated patients (n = 154) with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib (150 mg/d) or placebo on days 15 to 28 of a 4-week cycle that included gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8) and either cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) day 1) or carboplatin (5 x area under the serum concentration-time curve, day 1). The primary end point was nonprogression rate (NPR) at 8 weeks. Secondary end points included tumor response rate, NPR at 16 weeks, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.

RESULTS

The NPR at 8 weeks was 80.3% in the gemcitabine plus cisplatin or carboplatin (GC)-erlotinib arm (n = 76) and 76.9% in the GC-placebo arm (n = 78). At 16 weeks, the NPR was 64.5% for GC-erlotinib versus 53.8% for GC-placebo. The response rate was 35.5% for GC-erlotinib versus 24.4% for GC-placebo. PFS was significantly longer with GC-erlotinib than with GC-placebo (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.47; log-rank P = .0002; median, 29.4 v 23.4 weeks); this benefit was consistent across all clinical subgroups. There was no significant difference in OS. The addition of erlotinib to chemotherapy was well tolerated, with no increase in hematologic toxicity, and no treatment-related interstitial lung disease.

CONCLUSION

Sequential administration of erlotinib following gemcitabine/platinum chemotherapy led to a significant improvement in PFS. This treatment approach warrants further investigation in a phase III study.

A randomized phase II study of bortezomib and pemetrexed, in combination or alone, in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

This is a phase II randomized study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bortezomib and pemetrexed alone or in combination, in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary end point was assessment of response rate.

METHODS

A total of 155 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to pemetrexed (500mg/m(2)) on day 1 plus bortezomib (1.6mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 (Arm A) or pemetrexed (500mg/m(2)) on day 1 (Arm B) or bortezomib (1.6mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8 (Arm C) of a 21 day cycle. Response rate was assessed by investigators using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria and toxicity assessed by the National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) grading system.

RESULTS

Response rate was 7% in Arm A, 4% in Arm B, and 0% in Arm C; disease control rates were 73%, 62%, and 43%, respectively. Median overall survival was 8.6 months in Arm A, 12.7 months in Arm B, and 7.8 months in Arm C; time to progression was 4.0 months, 2.9 months, and 1.4 months, respectively. Most common reported adverse events >/=grade 3 were neutropenia (19%), thrombocytopenia (15%), and dyspnea (13%) in Arm A, neutropenia (10%) in Arm B, and dyspnea (13%) and fatigue (10%) in Arm C.

CONCLUSION

In previously treated NSCLC the addition of bortezomib to pemetrexed was well tolerated but offered no statistically significant response or survival advantage versus pemetrexed alone, while bortezomib alone showed no clinically significant activity.

Duration of Chemotherapy for Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Purpose

To determine if it is preferable to extend chemotherapy beyond a standard number of cycles in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for advanced non–small-cell lung cancer.

Methods

We searched biomedical literature databases and conference proceedings for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a defined number of cycles with continuation of the same chemotherapy until disease progression, a larger defined number of cycles of identical chemotherapy, and a defined number of cycles of identical initial chemotherapy followed by additional cycles of an alternative chemotherapy. Meta-analysis was performed using the fixed effect model. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS); secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AE), and health-related quality of life (HRQL).

Results

We found 13 RCTs including 3,027 patients. Extending chemotherapy improved PFS substantially (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.81; P < .00001) and OS modestly (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.99; P = .03). Subgroup analysis revealed that effects on PFS were greater for trials extending chemotherapy with third-generation regimens rather than older regimens (HR, 0.70 interaction v 0.92 interaction; P = .003). Extending chemotherapy was associated with more frequent AE in all trials where it was reported and impaired HRQL in two of seven trials.

Conclusion

Extending chemotherapy, particularly with a third-generation regimen, improved PFS substantially, but OS less so. Future trials should test extending treatment with more effective and/or better-tolerated agents.

Phase II evaluation of pemetrexed in the treatment of recurrent or persistent platinum-resistant ovarian or primary peritoneal carcinoma: a study of the Gynecologic Oncology Group

PURPOSE

To estimate the antitumor activity of pemetrexed in patients with persistent or recurrent platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian or primary peritoneal cancer and to determine the nature and degree of toxicities.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A phase II trial was conducted by the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Patients must have had cancer that had progressed on platinum-based primary chemotherapy or recurred within 6 months. Pemetrexed at a dose of 900 mg/m(2) was to be administered as an intravenous infusion over 10 minutes every 21 days. Dose delay and adjustment was permitted for toxicity. Treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable adverse effects.

RESULTS

From July 6, 2004, to August 23, 2006, 51 patients were entered. A total of 259 cycles (median, four; range one to 19 cycles) of pemetrexed were administered, with 40% of patients receiving six or more cycles. Overall, the treatment was well tolerated. More serious toxicities (grade 3 and 4) included neutropenia in 42%, leukopenia in 25%, anemia in 15%, and constitutional in 15% of patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. One patient (2%) had a complete and nine patients (19%) had partial responses, with a median duration response of 8.4 months. Seventeen patients (35%) had stable disease for a median of 4.1 months. Eighteen patients (38%) had increasing disease. Three patients (6%) were not assessable. Median progression-free survival was 2.9 months, and overall survival was 11.4 months.

CONCLUSION

Pemetrexed has sufficient activity in the treatment of recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer at the dose and schedule tested to warrant further investigation.

Treatment paradigms for advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer in the era of multiple lines of therapy

The duration of first-line and the timing of second-line therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer has been an area of recent investigation. Five trials have been performed that have investigated shorter (3-4 cycles) versus longer duration of platinum-based therapy; four trials revealed an equivalent overall survival with the shorter duration of therapy, and one trial revealed superior survival with the longer duration of therapy. The toxicity and quality of life data has either been equivalent or favored the shorter duration of therapy. Two trials have investigated the timing of a second-line therapy after completion of four cycles of platinum-based therapy versus the standard treatment paradigm of initiating second-line therapy upon disease progression. Both of these trials have revealed a statistically significant improvement in the progression-free survival, and a trend towards improved survival for the earlier use of second-line therapy. Only 50 to 60% of patients on the standard treatment arm initiated second-line therapy, and the promising results observed are most likely related to the fact that a higher percentage of patients received second-line therapy on the experimental arm. Several trials have investigated maintenance chemotherapy, and these trials have not revealed a survival benefit probably due to the fact that many patients experience disease progression or unacceptable toxicity during the initial or maintenance therapy. The addition of a targeted agent (bevacizumab or cetuximab) to the initial chemotherapy and the continuation of the targeted agent after completion of the chemotherapy have yielded superior overall survival in comparison to chemotherapy alone. The incremental benefit of the maintenance therapy with the targeted agent is unknown.

Phase II study of pemetrexed and carboplatin plus bevacizumab with maintenance pemetrexed and bevacizumab as first-line therapy for nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed, carboplatin, and bevacizumab followed by maintenance pemetrexed and bevacizumab in patients with chemotherapy-naive stage IIIB (effusion) or stage IV nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients received pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2), carboplatin area under the concentration-time curve of 6, and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks for six cycles. For patients with response or stable disease, pemetrexed and bevacizumab were continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were enrolled and received treatment. The median follow-up was 13.0 months, and the median number of treatment cycles was seven (range, one to 51). Thirty patients (60%) completed > or = six treatment cycles, and nine (18%) completed > or = 18 treatment cycles. Among the 49 patients assessable for response, the objective response rate was 55% (95% CI, 41% to 69%). Median progression-free and overall survival rates were 7.8 months (95% CI, 5.2 to 11.5 months) and 14.1 months (95% CI, 10.8 to 19.6 months), respectively. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was modest-anemia (6%; 0), neutropenia (4%; 0), and thrombocytopenia (0; 8%). Grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were proteinuria (2%; 0), venous thrombosis (4%; 2%), arterial thrombosis (2%; 0), fatigue (8%; 0), infection (8%; 2%), nephrotoxicity (2%; 0), and diverticulitis (6%; 2%). There were no grade 3 or greater hemorrhagic events or hypertension cases.

CONCLUSION

This regimen, involving a maintenance component, was associated with acceptable toxicity and relatively long survival in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. These results justify a phase III comparison against the standard-of-care in this patient population.

Phase III study by the Norwegian lung cancer study group: pemetrexed plus carboplatin compared with gemcitabine plus carboplatin as first-line chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE To compare pemetrexed/carboplatin with a standard regimen as first-line therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and performance status of 0 to 2 were randomly assigned to receive pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) plus carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) = 5 (Calvert's formula) on day 1 or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 plus carboplatin AUC = 5 on day 1 every 3 weeks for up to four cycles. The primary end point was health-related quality of life (HRQoL) defined as global quality of life, nausea/vomiting, dyspnea, and fatigue reported on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and the lung cancer-specific module LC13 during the first 20 weeks. Secondary end points were overall survival and toxicity. Results Four hundred thirty-six eligible patients were enrolled from April 2005 to July 2006. Patients who completed the baseline questionnaire were analyzed for HRQoL (n = 427), and those who received > or = one cycle of chemotherapy were analyzed for toxicity (n = 423). Compliance of HRQoL questionnaires was 87%. There were no significant differences for the primary HRQoL end points or in overall survival between the two treatment arms (pemetrexed/carboplatin, 7.3 months; gemcitabine/carboplatin, 7.0 months; P = .63). The patients who received gemcitabine/carboplatin had more grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicity than patients who received pemetrexed/carboplatin, including leukopenia (46% v 23%, respectively; P < .001), neutropenia (51% v 40%, respectively; P = .024), and thrombocytopenia (56% v 24%, respectively; P < .001). More patients on the gemcitabine/carboplatin arm received transfusions of RBCs and platelets, whereas the frequencies of neutropenic infections and thrombocytopenic bleedings were similar on both arms. CONCLUSION Pemetrexed/carboplatin provides similar HRQoL and survival when compared with gemcitabine/carboplatin with less hematologic toxicity and less need for supportive care.

Randomized Phase II and Pharmacogenetic Study of Pemetrexed Compared With Pemetrexed Plus Carboplatin in Pretreated Patients With Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose

We performed a randomized phase II trial comparing pemetrexed with pemetrexed plus carboplatin (PC) in patients experiencing relapse after platinum-based chemotherapy.

Patients and Methods

Main eligibility criteria were histologic or cytologic proof of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), relapse more than 3 months after platinum-based chemotherapy, normal organ function, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 2. Patients were randomly assigned to pemetrexed 500 mg/m2(arm A) or carboplatin area under the curve 5 and pemetrexed 500 mg/m2(arm B), both administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Response assessment was performed every 6 weeks; toxicity assessment was performed every 3 weeks. Primary end point was time to progression (TTP); secondary end points were objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. The study was designed to detect a 33% decrease in the hazard of disease progression in the combination arm (α = 0.05, two-sided log-rank test). Polymorphisms of thymidylate synthase, the reduced folate carrier, γ-glutamyl hydrolase, and methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHF) were investigated in peripheral WBCs of consenting patients.

Results

Two hundred forty patients were enrolled. Median TTP was 2.8 months for arm A versus 4.2 months for arm B (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.89; P = .005). Median OS was 7.6 months and 8.0 months and ORR was 4% and 9% for arms A and B, respectively. Subgroup analyses found adenocarcinoma to be associated with favorable outcome. Toxicities in both arms was negligible, with one potential toxic death in arm A. Patients with MTHFR C677T homozygous mutation had increased progression-free survival compared with patients with wild-type or heterozygous mutations (P = .03).

Conclusion

PC as second-line treatment for relapsed NSCLC resulted in a significant 33% reduction of the hazard of disease progression as compared with pemetrexed alone.

Pemetrexed in first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer

Pemetrexed is an antitumor agent traditionally used as monotherapy for the second-line treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) as well as in combination with cisplatin for the treatment of chemonaïve patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma. Recently, pemetrexed has been approved in combination with cisplatin for the first-line treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC other than predominantly squamous cell histology. Studies that support the development of this indication are detailed in this review. We performed a PubMed/Medline database search to identify relevant literature from 1998 until August 2008. Bibliographies from identified references were searched, as well as were abstracts from the most relevant congresses in lung cancer area (American Society of Clinical Oncology Congress, World Conferences of Lung Cancer). We detailed pemetrexed studies in the first-line setting of NSCLC treatment, in monotherapy, in combination with platinum and also, with other agents. Data regarding efficacy differences related to different histologic types were also analyzed.

Potential treatment options after first-line chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC: maintenance treatment or early second-line?

Although substantial progress has been made in the therapeutic options currently available for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the overall survival profile remains poor for most patients. One of the strategies currently under investigation with the aim of prolonging survival in NSCLC patients is maintenance treatment with either a chemotherapeutic agent or a molecularly targeted agent after first-line chemotherapy. Moreover, this can consist of drugs included in the induction regimen or other noncrossresistant agents. With the currently available data, maintenance treatment with a different noncrossresistant agent (i.e., an early second-line treatment) is perhaps the most promising strategy. The drug chosen for the early second-line treatment should be a well-tolerated agent, considering that patients have just completed a particularly toxic platinum-based chemotherapy. Extending treatment with targeted agents rather than chemotherapy can provide longer progression-free and overall survival times without increasing toxicity. However, at the moment, only progression-free survival has been shown to be consistently superior with maintenance approaches; the evaluation of survival benefits is warranted before defining this strategy as a possible treatment option. Further studies are warranted to establish the role of maintenance chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Optimal duration of first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal duration of first-line chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been a matter for debate for nearly 20 years. In order to elucidate this issue, a meta-analysis comparing the different durations of same treatments was performed.

METHODS

We searched for all published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different durations of first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and CENTRAL databases were searched for RCTs comparing a defined number of cycles of chemotherapy versus continuing treatment until disease progression, or a defined number of cycles versus a higher number of cycles of the same chemotherapy. Trials including biological agents were excluded.

RESULTS

Seven trials that included 1559 patients were analysed. Treatment for more than 4 cycles was associated with a non-statistically significant decrease in the hazard of mortality relative to shorter treatment (hazard ratio (HR)=0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.84-1.11; P=.65). In those treated with third-generation chemotherapy through the whole study time, treatment for more than 4 cycles was associated with a non-statistically significant increase in mortality (HR=1.08; 95% CI=0.90-1.28; P=.28). Patients receiving more chemotherapy had significant longer progression-free survival (HR=.75; 95% CI=0.60-0.85; P<0.0001) than the group with shorter duration of treatment. In an intent-to-treat analysis, there was no difference in the overall response rate between the groups (odds ratio (OR)=0.78; 95% CI=0.60-1.01; P=.96). Longer treatment was associated with more severe leucopaenia but with no significant increase in non-haematological toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with advanced NSCLC the use of more than 4 cycles of first-line chemotherapy with third-generation regimens significantly increases progression-free survival but not overall survival and is associated with higher incidence of adverse events. There is no evidence to support continuous chemotherapy until progression in patients with lung cancer.

Phase III study of immediate compared with delayed docetaxel after front-line therapy with gemcitabine plus carboplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

Gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GC) is active as front-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). For patients without progression, timing of second-line chemotherapy for optimum clinical benefit remains uncertain. This phase III, randomized trial assessed the efficacy and safety of docetaxel administered either immediately after GC or at disease progression.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The chemotherapy-naïve patients enrolled had either stage IIIB NSCLC with pleural effusion or stage IV NSCLC. Gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)) was administered on days 1 and 8 followed by carboplatin (area under the curve = 5) on day 1. After four 21-day cycles, patients who did not have progression were randomly assigned either to an immediate docetaxel group (docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 21 days, with maximum of six cycles) or to a delayed docetaxel group. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) measured from random assignment. Additional analyses included tumor response, toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS), and quality of life (QOL).

RESULTS

Enrollment totaled 566 patients; 398 patients completed GC; 309 patients were randomly assigned equally to the two docetaxel treatment groups. Toxicity profiles were generally comparable for the docetaxel groups. Median PFS for immediate docetaxel (5.7 months) was significantly greater (P = .0001) than for delayed docetaxel (2.7 months). Median OS for immediate docetaxel (12.3 months) was greater than for delayed docetaxel (9.7 months), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .0853). QOL results were not statistically different (P = .76) between docetaxel groups.

CONCLUSION

We observed a statistically significant improvement in PFS and a nonstatistically significant increase in OS when docetaxel was administered immediately after front-line GC, without increasing toxicity or decreasing QOL.

From the podium to the patient: bringing the 2008 ASCO meeting to the clinic

Around 4,800 abstracts on preclinical and clinical research in different oncology areas were presented and discussed by oncology clinicians and scientists at the 44th American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting, the largest international forum in the field. As expected, the meeting provided valuable insights into future developments as well as enlightening clinicians regarding current controversies. This manuscript is an opinion-based review of the studies presented at the meeting, focusing on findings from randomized phase III trials and translational researches that, in the authors' opinion, are most likely to modify clinical practice or help scientists in designing future translational and clinical studies.